9 U.S.C. § 16
Appeals
1990—Pub. L. 101–650 renumbered the second section 15 of this title as this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2,050
cases (506 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela
Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela (2019)
“9 U. S. C. §16 . Varela contends that the Ninth Circuit lacked statutory jurisdiction because section 16 permits appeal from orders denying motions to compel arbitration, §16(a)(1)(B), but not orders granting such motions, §16(b)(2).”
Virginia Van Dusen v. Swift Transportation Co (2016)
“In addition, the order was not reviewable under 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a)(1)(B) on the basis that it had the practical effect of denying a motion to compel arbitration.”
Bruno Lloyd v. Hovensa, LLC Wyatt, V.I., Inc. Bruno Lloyd v. Hovensa, LLC Wyatt, V.I., Inc. (2004)
“The District Court exercised supplemental jurisdiction over Lloyd’s Virgin Islands claims pursuant to 28 U.”
Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski (2023)
“Coinbase then fled an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U. S. C. § 16 (a), which authorizes an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion to compel arbitration.”
Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. Randolph (2000)
“In this case we first address whether an order compelling arbitration and dismissing a party's underlying claims is a "final decision with respect to an arbitration" within the meaning of § 16(a)(3) of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U. S. C. § 16 (a)(3), and thus is immediately…”
Paula Blair v. Rent-A-Center, Inc. (2019)
“RENT-A-CENTER 3 The panel held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the district court’s denial of a discretionary stay because appellate jurisdiction under the Federal Arbitration Act over interlocutory appeals is limited to the orders listed in 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a)(1). The panel…”
Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc. v. Cahill (2015)
“We have jurisdiction to hear this appeal under 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a)(1)(A). On the merits, we affirm.”
Damian Langere v. Verizon Wireless Services (2020)
“Ordinarily, a plaintiff in this position has two choices to appeal: arbitrate the claims to completion and then appeal as of right, see 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a)(1)(3), (b)(1)–(3), or hope that the courts approve an interlocutory appeal, id.”
Sawyers v. Herrin-Gear Chevrolet Co., Inc. (2010)
“See 9 U.S.C. § 16 (2006). We also find it necessary to discuss this Court's appellate jurisdiction over orders granting motions to compel arbitration and to resolve any ambiguity that may appear in prior decisions of this Court on this issue.”
Samake v. Thunder Lube, Inc. (2022)
“” 9 U.S.C. § 16 . These two rules are jurisdictional.”
In Re Poly-America, L.P. (2008)
“See 9 U.S.C. § 16 (b)(1) ("[A]n appeal may not be taken from an interlocutory order.”
Stolt-Nielsen S. A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp. (2010)
“See 9 U. S. C. §16 (a)(1)(E) (“An appeal may be taken from .”
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(a) — 2 cases
Davitashvili v. Grubhub Inc. (2023)
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1) — 4 cases
French v. Wachovia Bank (2009)
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(A) — 5 cases
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(B) — 5 cases
Crowe v. GGNSC Ripley, LLC (2018)
David Holm v. Menard, Inc. (2021)
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(1)(C) — 2 cases
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(3) — 2 cases
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(b) — 3 cases
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(b)(1) — 2 cases
— 9 U.S.C. § 16(b)(3) — 1 case
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.