Munger, Tolles & Olson litigators E. Martin Estrada and Kuruvilla J. Olasa published an article in the Daily Journal on Dec. 28, 2017 about the “legal tug-of-war” between the U.S. Supreme Court and state courts involving the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).
In the article, Mr. Estrada and Mr. Olasa outline the U.S. Supreme Court’s consistent rejection of states’ efforts to limit the enforcement of arbitration agreements. They also describe efforts by states such as California to limit the reach of the FAA and allow cases seeking class-wide or similar relief to proceed in state court despite agreements to arbitrate.
“What we see from these recent decisions are two sides in a legal tug-of-war: The U.S. Supreme Court has wielded the FAA to strike down state-created obstacles to arbitration and allow for broader enforcement of arbitration agreements; but, at the same time, state courts have been just as persistent in attempting to stem the tide of arbitration and maintain access to the courts,” they write.
The attorneys conclude that, given the costs and delays that come with court litigation, and the FAA’s protection of arbitration agreements, resolution of disputes through arbitration will only increase in the future, meaning that parties and practitioners will need to become well-versed in the procedural and substantive intricacies of arbitration.
Mr. Estrada focuses on trials, arbitrations, complex litigation and internal investigations. He represents major corporations and executives before both federal and state courts in a variety of areas, including business disputes, technology, antitrust, environmental regulation, securities, banking, and competition law.
Mr. Olasa focuses on complex civil litigation. He has experience litigating cases at all stages, including cross-examining witnesses at trial, taking and defending depositions, writing dispositive motions and managing all aspects of discovery.