9 U.S.C. § 2
Validity, irrevocability, and enforcement of agreements to arbitrate
A written provision in any maritime transaction or a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transaction, or the refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof, or an agreement in writing to submit to arbitration an existing controversy arising out of such a contract, transaction, or refusal, shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract or as otherwise provided in chapter 4.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7,723
cases (2,666 in the last 5 years), 1927–2026 · leading case: Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno
Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno (2013)
“‖ 9 U.S.C. § 2 . . . . Thus state law, whether of legislative or judicial 18 origin, is applicable if that law arose to govern issues concerning the validity, revocability, and enforceability of contracts generally.”
Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto (1996)
“" 9 U. S. C. § 2 . Montana law, however, declares an arbitration clause unenforceable unless "[n]otice that [the] contract is subject to arbitration" is "typed in underlined capital letters on the first page of the contract.”
Taylor v. Extendicare Health Facilities, Inc. (2016)
“” 9 U.S.C. § 2 . Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 213(e) requires the consolidation of survival and wrongful death actions for trial.”
Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos., Inc. v. Dobson (1995)
“" 9 U. S. C. § 2 (emphasis added). Should we read this phrase broadly, extending the Act's reach to the limits of Congress' Commerce Clause power? Or, do the two italicized words"involving" and "evidencing"significantly restrict the Act's application? We conclude that the…”
Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis (2018)
“But the court reasoned that the statute’s “saving clause,” see 9 U. S. C. §2 , removes this obligation if an arbitration agreement violates some other federal law.”
Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams (2001)
“" 9 U. S. C. § 2 . We had occasion in Allied-Bruce, supra, at 273-277 , to consider the significance of Congress' use of the words "involving commerce" in § 2.”
David Tompkins v. 23andme, Inc. (2016)
“The panel concluded that the arbitration agreement was valid and enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 2 . The panel also rejected plaintiffs’ challenges to provisions in the Terms of Service not contained within the arbitration clause itself.”
Southland Corp. v. Keating (1984)
“[1] Alternatively, the court concluded that if the Franchise Investment Law rendered arbitration agreements involving commerce unenforceable, it would conflict with § 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U. S. C. § 2 , and therefore be invalid under the Supremacy Clause.”
King v. Bryant (2017)
“2d 362 (2009), and the fact that defendants have made no attempt to show that the present arbitration agreement is subject to the Federal Arbitration Act,4 we do not believe that our decision in this case is in any way 4 Any federal preemption claim advanced in this case…”
Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela (2019)
“See 9 U. S. C. §2 . In Stolt-Nielsen S. A. v.”
Stephen Morris v. Ernst & Young (2016)
“9 U.S.C. § 2 . The Act requires courts to “place arbitration contracts ‘on equal footing with all other contracts,’” DIRECTV, Inc.”
Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp. (1991)
“" 9 U. S. C. § 2 . The FAA also provides for stays of proceedings in federal district courts when an issue in the proceeding is referable to arbitration, § 3, and for orders compelling arbitration when one party has failed, neglected, or refused to comply with an arbitration…”
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.