Over the past year, the circuit courts have differed over whether the “manifest disregard of the law” doctrine survives the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Hall Street. Hall Street Assoc. v. Mattel, Inc., 128 S. Ct. 1396 (2008). In a recent article, Philip J. Loree Jr. analyzes the Second Circuit’s interpretation of Hall Street in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 548 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2008).
Interestingly, the Stolt-Nielsen court adopted Judge Posner’s reasoning in Wise v. Wachovia Sec., LLC, 450 F.3d 265 (7th Cir. 2006) and Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s analysis in Westerbeke v. Daihatsu Motor Co., 304 F.3d 200 (2d Cir. 2002). Read the full article here: Hall Street Meets Pearl Street: Stolt-Nielsen and the Federal Arbitration Act’s New Section 10(a)(4), Loreee Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum, May 29, 2009.
- Read Our Guest-Post: Hall Street Meets S. Maestri Place (May 5, 2009)
- Fifth Circuit Denies Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award (Apr. 7, 2009)
- Fifth Circuit: Life After Hall Street (Mar. 17, 2009)
- Dead? Alive? Matter of Opinion? (Dec. 4, 2008)
- Rau Responds (Jun. 9, 2008)
- Rau Gives Souter a C-minus (Jun. 5, 2008)
- Glen Wilkerson on Hall Street v. Mattel (Apr. 19, 2008)
- No Longer Can You Craft Your Own Arbitral Standard of Review (Mar. 26, 2008)