Marc J. Goldstein Arbitrator & Mediator NYC

Recent Posts

May 13, 2010

More Support for Limiting Arbitral Subpoena Power

A federal magistrate judge in Chicago last week quashed an arbitrator’s  subpoena for the pre-hearing deposition of a non-party witness, citing with approval decisions of the Second, Third, and Fourth U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal  that interpret Section 7 of the Federal Arbitration Act to permit an arbitrator to subpoena witnesses only to appear before the arbitrator at a hearing and to bring with them to the hearing requested material documentary evidence. The magistrate judge also quoted with approval from a decision of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals: “The choice of arbitration is a choice to trade off certain…
Read More »

May 11, 2010

More Fuel on the Fire Concerning Section 1782 in Arbitration

Last week a federal district court judge in New York granted an application made by Chevron Corporation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1782, to obtain discovery from a non-party in the United States for use as evidence in a ICSID arbitration between Chevron and the Republic of Ecuador. (In re Application of Chevron Corp., Misc. No. 19-111 (S.D.N.Y. May 6, 2010). A copy of the not- officially-published decision is linked here.) That arbitration is taking place under the UNCITRAL Rules, based on the Bilateral Investment Treaty (“BIT”) between Ecuador and the United States. Two commentaries on a Partial Award in…
Read More »

May 05, 2010

Court Injunction Against FINRA Arbitration Again Denied

I have reported on three recent occasions concerning judicial decisions on arbitrability in the context of FINRA arbitrations. FINRA is the Financial Institutions Regulatory Authority, successor to the National Association of Securities Dealers, the principal self-regulatory organization of the financial services industry. In yet another such case, a New York federal judge last week denied a motion by J.P. Morgan Securities, Inc. (“Morgan”) (on its own behalf and as successor to Bear Stearns & Co. (“Bear”)) to enjoin a FINRA arbitration pending in Louisiana. However, the Court declined to enter an order compelling arbitration, interpreting Section 4 of the Federal…
Read More »

May 04, 2010

Interim Measures: Renewed Stringency in U.S. Injunction Standards

Arbitration practitioners should take note of a trend toward renewed stringency in U.S. judicial application of historical equitable standards for the granting of preliminary and permanent injunctions. The trend is most recently reflected in an important copyright law decision from the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals, discussed today in a new posting that will appear in the Legal Developments section of my website. www.lexmarc.us. Transnational principles governing the issuance of interim measures by international arbitrators are substantially informed by standards in domestic courts of major legal systems. As the recent U.S. trend dictates a return to a more rigorous…
Read More »

May 03, 2010

Securities Fraud Update at Lexmarc.US

Those of you who follow developments in U.S. securities litigation may wish to read my commentary on a recent Second Circuit decision concerning liability of professionals for fraudulent statements of their clients. www.lexmarc.us

April 27, 2010

First Thoughts on Stolt-Nielsen: When Deference is Not Due

The Supreme Court’s decision today in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. Animalfeeds International Inc., No. 08-1198, slip op., April 27, 2010, ends months of speculation about whether the Court would clarify the status of the “manifest disregard” disregard doctrine. The District Court in Stolt-Nielsen had relied upon the manifest disregard doctrine, before the Hall Street case, in deciding to vacate the arbitration panel’s decision in favor of class arbitration. The Second Circuit in Stolt-Nielsen held, after Hall Street, that the doctrine survives as a “judicial gloss” on Section 10(a)(4) of the FAA, i.e. as a description of the circumstances in which an…
Read More »