The Federal Arbitration Act After Alafabco: A Case Analysis

Authors

Benjamin D. Tievsky, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Abstract

In late 2009, a divided Supreme Court of Washington held in Satomi Owners Ass'n v. Satomi, L.L.C. that the arbitration provision in a warranty addendum to a sales contract between a condominium developer and an owners' association was enforceable. Specifically, the court held that the provision was within the reach of the Federal Arbitration Act, and that a Washington state statute preserving the parties' right to litigate with regard to the warranty addendum was therefore preempted. This Note will explore the potential importance of this decision for defining the contours of the applicability of the Federal Arbitration Act (at least in the state of Washington). It is an interesting case in that it exemplifies the ever-broadening scope of the Federal Arbitration Act, underpinned by a robust interpretation of the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This Note will examine the Satomi Owners Ass'n case in light of recent developments in United States Supreme Court jurisprudence concerning the Federal Arbitration Act, recent decisions from other states in cases dealing with similar fact patterns, and with an eye toward the larger questions of federalism that are implicated in these cases.

Disciplines

Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | Jurisdiction | Law | Medical Jurisprudence

Recommended Citation

Benjamin D. Tievsky, The Federal Arbitration Act After Alafabco: A Case Analysis, 11 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 675 (2010).
Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cjcr/vol11/iss2/13