9 U.S.C. § 15

Inapplicability of the Act of State doctrine

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 9 CasesGoogle Scholar

Enforcement of arbitral agreements, confirmation of arbitral awards, and execution upon judgments based on orders confirming such awards shall not be refused on the basis of the Act of State doctrine.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 81 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1929–2026 · leading case: Forsythe Int'l, S.A. v. Gibbs Oil Co. of Texas, 915 F.2d 1017 (5th Cir. 1990).
Forsythe Int'l, S.A. v. Gibbs Oil Co. of Texas, 915 F.2d 1017 (5th Cir. 1990). · cites it 4× “The statute that governs appellate jurisdiction of district court decisions in arbitration cases authorizes an appeal from an order vacating an arbitration award, 9 U.S.C. § 15 (a)(1)(E), or from “a final decision with respect to an arbitration,” 9 U.”
Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos., Inc. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265 (1995). · cites it 2× “, 9 U. S. C. § 15 (eliminating the Act of State doctrine as a bar to arbitration); 9 U.”
AG Edwards & Sons, Inc. v. Clark, 558 So. 2d 358 (Ala. 1990). · cites it 4× “All parties agree, as do we, that the defendants do indeed have a right to appeal the trial court's denial under 9 U.S.C. § 15 , the recent amendment to the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"); but the parties stoutly dispute whether the appeals were timely filed.”
Hays & Co., as Tr. for Monge Oil Corp. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 885 F.2d 1149 (3rd Cir. 1989). · cites it 3× “4670, 4671, codified at 9 U.S.C.A. § 15 , (“Judicial Improvements Act”) signed November 19, 1988.”
Batton v. Green, 801 S.W.2d 923 (Tex. App. 1990). · cites it 6× “(b) Except as otherwise provided in section 1292(b) of title 28, an appeal may not be taken from an interlocutory order— (1) granting a stay of action under section 3 of this title; (2) directing arbitration to proceed under section 4 of this title; (3) compelling arbitration…”
Repub. of Ecuador v. ChevronTexaco Corp., 376 F. Supp. 2d 334 (S.D.N.Y. 2005). · cites it 3× “” 9 U.S.C.A. § 15 (West 2005). Although this provision is .”
James G. Neal v. Hardee's Food Sys., Inc., 918 F.2d 34 (5th Cir. 1990). · cites it 2× “WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge: Pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 15 , appellant Har-dee’s Food Systems, Inc.”
Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266 (Tex. 1992). “1990); 9 U.S.C. § 15 (1988), amended by 9 U.S.C.”
United Offshore Co. v. S. Deepwater Pipeline Co., 899 F.2d 405 (5th Cir. 1990). · cites it 3× “1 Southern Deepwater now seeks to dissolve the injunction and to compel arbitration via an interlocutory appeal taken pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 15 . United Offshore and Southern Deepwa-ter are equal partners in Sea Robin Pipeline Company.”
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,913 Asset Allocation & Mgmt. Co. v. W. Employers Ins. Co., 892 F.2d 566 (7th Cir. 1990). · cites it 2× “9 U.S.C. § 15 (b)(2). The denial of the motion to transfer presents a closer question, since it is inconceivable that Judge Conlon would have enjoined Western from proceeding in a more convenient forum.”
Thomson McKinnon Sec., Inc. v. Kerrean L. Salter, Am. Arbitration Ass'n, 873 F.2d 1397 (11th Cir. 1989). · cites it 3× “Specifically, 9 U.S.C. § 15 now provides: (a) An appeal may be taken from— (1) an order— (A) refusing a stay of any action under section 3 of this title, (B) denying a petition under section 4 of this title to order arbitration to proceed, (C) denying an application under…”
Apollo Comput., Inc. v. Helge Berg, 886 F.2d 469 (1st Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “4670-71, codified at 9 U.S.C. § 15 , Congress provided that "an appeal may not be taken from an interlocutory order .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.