Vaden v. Discover Bank
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Oct 6, 2008
|Mar 9, 2009||5-4||Ginsburg||OT 2008|
Issue: Whether, under the Federal Arbitration Act, a suit seeking to enforce a state-law arbitration obligation arises under federal law if the petition to compel itself raises no federal question but the dispute sought to be arbitrated involves federal law.
Plain English Summary:
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on March 9, 2009.
- Where Would Justice Souterâ€™s Replacement Make a Difference? Part II (Kevin Russell)
- Where Would Justice Souterâ€™s Replacement Make A Difference? Part I (Kevin Russell)
- Limits on warrantless car searches, compensation to terrorism victims, veterans benefit disputes (Kristina Moore)
- Court rules against minority districts (Lyle Denniston)
- SCOTUSwiki Preview: Vaden v. Discover Bank (Eliza Presson)
- Court grants review of indecency law, 7 other cases (Lyle Denniston)
Briefs and DocumentsMerit briefs
- Brief for Petitioner Betty E. Vaden
- Brief for Respondent Discover Bank and Discover Financial Services, Inc.
- Reply Brief for Petitioner Betty E. Vaden
- Brief for the Financial Services Roundtable, the Consumer Bankers Association, the American Financial Services Association, the American Bankers Association, and the Maryland Bankers Association in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States and CTIAâ€”The Wireless AssociationÂ® in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Cintas Corporation in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Law Professors in Support of Respondent