Recently in Contract Law Category

Why it seems like only yesterday that many lawyers were just trying to figure out how to pronounce Concepcion.

Alas, that was 2011, and the Supreme Court is moving on to another arbitration dispute: American Express v. Italian Colors Restaurant.

The AmEx arbitration litigation has been going on for years. As in, Justice Sonia Sotomayor sat on one of the Second Circuit panels that heard the case when she was but a federal appellate judge. Again, nostalgia ...

Here at FindLaw, we understand the pressures of being a legal professional - most of us are recovering lawyers - so we want to help by tossing you that preferred life preserver of the legal profession, the short list.

The equitable remedies provision of ERISA Section 502(a)(3) has been a "hot topic" for years with the Supreme Court, according to BNA; every few years, the Court considers another case interpreting this provision in the context of plans' ability to seek reimbursement from plan participants who receive personal injury settlements. Here are five things you should know about the equitable remedies conflict in this term's ERISA case, U.S. Airways v. McCutchen.

John Steinbeck's heirs won't be standing in front of the U.S. Supreme Court anytime in the near future. The U.S. Supreme Court denied their petition for certiorari in a dispute centered around the copyrights to the famous author's works.

The case was filed by Thomas Steinbeck, the sole surviving son of John Steinbeck. Currently, Thomas and his daughter, Blake Smyle, receive a portion of the proceeds from Steinbeck book sales, reports The Associated Press.

According to Forbes, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and Divya Narendra want to sing their tale of Facebook woes at the national level. Nope, they're not going to be on Idol. Rather, we'll be entertained by their litigation antics, as Narendra and the Winklevoss twins are now eyeing the United States Supreme Court to plead their case in their ongoing Facebook lawsuit.

Earlier this week, the Winklevoss twins were denied their petition for a rehearing en banc by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In fact, Judge Alex Kozinski went one step further in his written opinion and actually reprimanded the Winklevoss twins, stating that "litigation must come to an end."

Rent-A-Center West, Inc. v. Jackson, No. 09-497, involved an employment discrimination action.  The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's reversal of the district court's dismissal of the action based on the parties' agreement, holding that, under the Federal Arbitration Act, where an agreement to arbitrate includes an agreement that the arbitrator will determine the enforceability of the agreement, if a party challenges specifically the enforceability of that particular agreement, the district court considers the challenge, but if a party challenges the enforceability of the agreement as a whole, the challenge is for the arbitrator.

As the Court wrote:  "We consider whether, under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA or Act), 9 U. S. C. §§1-16, a district court may decide a claim that an arbitration agreement is unconscionable, where the agreement explicitly assigns that decision to the arbitrator."

Related Resources

• Full Text of Rent-A-Center West, Inc. v. Jackson, No. 09-497
• Federal Arbitration Act

American Needle, Inc. v. Nat'l Football League, No. 08-661, involved an an antitrust action challenging the NFL's grant to Reebok of an exclusive license to create apparel incorporating the NFL's intellectual property.  The Supreme Court reversed the Seventh Circuit's affirmance of summary judgment for defendants, holding that the alleged conduct related to licensing of intellectual property constituted concerted action that was not categorically beyond the coverage of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.

As the Court wrote:  ""Every contract, combination in the form of a trust or otherwise, or, conspiracy, in restraint of trade" is made illegal by §1 of the Sherman Act, ch. 647, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U.S.C. §1. The question whether an arrangement is a contract, combination, or conspiracy is different from and antecedent to the question whether it unreasonably restrains trade. This case raises that antecedent question about the business of the 32 teams in the National Football League (NFL) and a corporate entity that they formed to manage their intellectual property. We conclude that the NFL's licensing activities constitute concerted action that is not categorically beyond the coverage of §1. The legality of that concerted action must be judged under the Rule of Reason."

Related Resources

• Full Text of American Needle, Inc. v. Nat'l Football League, No. 08-661
• 15 U.S.C. section 1
• American Needle victory puts NFL on defense (Chicago Tribune)
  

Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int'l. Corp., No. 08-1198, involved an antitrust class action in which the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's order vacating an arbitration panel's order allowing for class arbitration of the dispute.

As the court wrote:  "We granted certiorari in this case to decide whether imposing class arbitration on parties whose arbitration clauses are "silent" on that issue is consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U. S. C. §1 et seq."

The Supreme Court reversed, holding that imposing class arbitration on parties who had not agreed to authorize class arbitration was inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act, and the arbitration panel imposed class arbitration despite the parties' stipulation that they had reached "no agreement" on that issue.

Related Resources

• Full Text of Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int'l. Corp., No. 08-1198
• Federal Arbitration Act