We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics. If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit made several key rulings about determining the scope of a maritime arbitration agreement in its decision in the case of Cape Flattery Ltd. v. Titan Maritime, LLC issued on July 26, 2011
In Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. Bhd. of Locomotive Engineers, No. 08-604 (December 8, 2009), the Court unanimously held that a union’s failure to present evidence of efforts to reach a settlement through “conferencing” did not preclude the National Railroad Adjustment Board from exercising jurisdiction over the union’s claim
