Nitro-Lift Technologies, L. L. C. v. Howard
Supreme Court of the United States
1Per curiam
State courts rather than federal courts are most frequently called upon to apply the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA or Act), 9 U. S. C. § 1 et seq., including the Act’s national policy favoring arbitration. It is a matter of great importance, therefore, that state supreme courts adhere to a correct interpretation of the legislation. Here, the Oklahoma Supreme Court failed to do so. By declaring the non-competition agreements in two employment contracts null and void, rather than leaving that determination to the arbitrator in the first instance, the state court ignored a basic tenet of the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Baldwin v. ReeseSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Southland Corp. v. KeatingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. CardegnaSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by176 opinions
- I. C. v. StockX, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021
- D.A. Osguthorpe Family Partnership v. ASC Utah, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
- Taylor v. Extendicare Health Facilities, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Mehdi Noohi v. Toll Bros., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013
- Kevin Ferguson v. Corinthian Colleges, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
171 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.