Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Return to Fordham Law School
    X (Twitter) Facebook LinkedIn Instagram RSS
    Fordham Law News
    • Home
    • Law School News
    • In the News
    • Fordham Lawyer
    • Insider
      • Announcements
      • Class Notes
      • In Memoriam
    • For the Media
      • Media Contacts
    • News by Topic
      • Business and Financial Law
      • Clinics
      • Intellectual Property and Information Law
      • International and Human Rights Law
      • Legal Ethics and Professional Practice
      • National Security
      • Public Interest and Service
    Return to Fordham Law School
    X (Twitter) Facebook LinkedIn Instagram RSS
    Fordham Law News
    You are at:Home»Faculty»Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch Seems to be Pro-Arbitration

    Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch Seems to be Pro-Arbitration

    0
    By Newsroom on February 8, 2017 Faculty, In the News, Transition to Trump

    Adjunct Professor George H. Friedman wrote a blog post regarding the views on arbitration held by Neil M. Gorsuch, President Trump’s nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.

     

    Opinion Authored

     

    Judge Gorsuch penned a well-written, entertaining- if-exasperated Opinion in Howard v. Ferrellgas Partners, L.P., 748 F.3d 975 (10th Cir. 2014). The District Court had denied a motion to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) based solely on the pleadings and motions over an elongated period. The 10th Circuit reversed in a unanimous ruling, finding that FAA section 4 in these circumstances requires a speedy trial by the court. Writing for the Court, Judge Gorsuch said: “The object is always to decide quickly – summarily – the proper venue for the case, whether it be the courtroom or the conference room, so the parties can get on with the merits of their dispute…When factual disputes may determine whether the parties agreed to arbitrate, the way to resolve them isn’t by round after round of discovery and motions practice. It is by proceeding summarily to trial. That is the procedure the [Federal Arbitration]Act requires and the parties should have undertaken a long time ago – and it is the procedure they must follow now” (emphasis in original).

    …

    Dissenting Opinion

     

    In Ragab v. Howard, 2016 WL 6832870 (10th Cir. Nov. 21, 2016), a divided court refused to compel arbitration even though the parties executed six contracts with conflicting arbitration agreements. Judge Gorsuch dissented, arguing that the parties clearly agreed to arbitrate, but merely differed on what he considered non-essential terms over how arbitration should proceed: “My colleagues are of course correct that ‘arbitration clauses are only valid if the parties intended to arbitrate’ … But, respectfully, I just don’t see any doubt that the parties before us did intend to arbitrate. All six – yes six – of the parties’ interrelated commercial agreements contain arbitration clauses. The plaintiff himself, the party the court today permits to avoid arbitration, instructed his own counsel to draft three of these agreements. In my view, parties to a commercial deal could have hardly demonstrated with greater clarity an intention to arbitrate their disputes and I see no way we might lawfully rescue them from their choice… I see two easy workarounds that I believe would be more consistent with the parties expressed purposes than the course my colleagues chart.”

    …

    Other Cases

     

    Also last year, Judge Gorsuch joined the majority in CEEG (Shanghai) Solar Science & Technology Co., Ltd. v. LUMOS, LLC, No.15-1256 (10th Cir. July 19, 2016), where a unanimous Court held that where the parties’ contracts and dealings were in English, a Chinese-language notice of arbitration violated the recipient’s due process rights. Judge Gorsuch was part of a unanimous panel in Sanchez v. Nitro Lift Technologies, LLC, 762 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2014), where the Circuit joined the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 8th and 11th Circuits in holding that the Fair Labor Standards Act does not preclude enforcing predispute arbitration agreements. An interesting case was Johnson v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 625 F.3d 1373 (10th Cir. 2005), which involved res judicata and arbitration. Johnson lost an arbitration in which he had contended that he was terminated for filing a claim with the EEOC. “Years later” he filed another retaliation claim with the Merit Systems Protection Board, this one claiming he was retaliated against for reporting a fight. Asserting res judicata, the Board dismissed the claim. In upholding the Board’s application of res judicata, the Court finds that the claim should have been asserted in the original arbitration.

    …

    Conclusion

     

    The late Justice Scalia, whose seat Judge Gorsuch would take, was known for his witty writing style. I suggest Judge Gorsuch if approved will nicely play this role. Also, it’s always nice to check off one of my new-year predictions. Recall that as the new year dawned, I blogged “Who will President Trump nominate? While at this point it’s hard to suggest a single name – who may or may not come from the list compiled by candidate Trump – it’s a safe assumption in my view that whoever it is will be supportive of arbitration.” Check!

     

    Read full article.

     

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

    Related Posts

    The Big Idea: All Lawyers Should Be Climate-Informed Lawyers

    Professor Catherine Powell Selected for Prestigious Princeton Fellowship

    Bloomberg Law: Prof. Bruce Green Says Rules of Professional Conduct Will Be Tested as KPMG Law Eyes National Reach

    Comments are closed.

    • The Big Idea
    September 8, 2025

    The Big Idea: All Lawyers Should Be Climate-Informed Lawyers

    August 5, 2025

    The Big Idea: Who Counts (and Who Doesn’t) in the U.S. Census 

    March 31, 2025

    The Big Idea: Local Politics, Reform Prosecutors, and Reshaping Mass Incarceration

    March 3, 2025

    The Big Idea: Forced Labor, Global Supply Chains, and Workers’ Rights

    READ MORE

    About

    Fordham University - The Jesuit University of New York

    Founded in 1841, Fordham is the Jesuit University of New York, offering exceptional education distinguished by the Jesuit tradition to more than 15,100 students in its four undergraduate colleges and its six graduate and professional schools.
    Connect With Fordham
    © 2025 ThemeSphere. Designed by ThemeSphere.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.