When I ask litigators why they don’t choose arbitration over litigation before unpredictable judges in a crowded court, their answer invariably is “because I can’t appeal the ruling.” We cling to appellate review even though we appeal fewer cases than we try — which is a very small percentage of our case load as it is.
Not surprising, however, we litigators, as Max Kennerly recently noted, tend to be risk-averse, not risk-embracing (h/t Blawg Review # 174). To give up that one last chance for our client to be vindicated and for us to be triumphant is generally just too much for us.
Now we can have our arbitration cake and and follow it up with appellate ice cream. Yesterday, the California Supreme Court in Cable Connection, Inc. v. DirecTV held that arbitrating parties’ agreement to seek appellate review of legal errors is enforceable in California State Courts despite its uneforceability in federal court. As the Supreme Court explained:
I recently found an interesting and possibly invaluable quote that may be worthy of our attention concerning peacemaking, conflict and ultimate restoration. “Peace is not just about the absence of...
By Richard CustinIn Chesney v. Hypertension Diagnostics, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's conclusion that a mediated memorandum agreement is binding and enforceable despite the parties' failure to complete a more...
By James CobenOriginally published in the Penn State Law Review, Volume 108, Number 1, Summer 2003I. Introduction Fifteen years have passed since Tom Fee portrayed the champions of the fledgling field of...
By Timothy Hedeen Hedeen
