Legal Opinion

Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 24, 2019No. 17-988PublishedCited by 366 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Roberts

*1412The Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to enforce covered arbitration agreements according to their terms. See 9 U.S.C. § 2. In Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int'l Corp. , 559 U.S. 662, 130 S.Ct. 1758, 176 L.Ed.2d 605 (2010), we held that a court may not compel arbitration on a classwide basis when an agreement is "silent" on the availability of such arbitration. Because class arbitration fundamentally changes the nature of the "traditional individualized arbitration" envisioned by the FAA, Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis , 584 U.S. ----, ----, 138 S.Ct. 1612, 1623, 200 L.Ed.2d 889…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Pembaur v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by366 opinions

  1. Smith v. SpizzirriSupreme Court of the United States · 2024
  2. Loper Bright Enterprises v. RaimondoSupreme Court of the United States · 2024
  3. Oto, L. L.C. v. KhoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
  4. Timothy Boykin v. Family Dollar Stores of Mich.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021
  5. Susie Bigger v. Facebook, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020

361 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API