Supremes rule on arbitration jurisdiction, voting law, speedy trial right and expert witness fees

supremestatToday the Supreme Court handed down for decisions, including a ruling that federal courts may “look through” Federal Arbitration Act petitions to compel arbitration, but cannot hear a case unless the whole underlying controversy between the parties qualifies for federal court adjudication. That ruling came in the case of Vaden v. Discover Bank. More here from Lawyers USA.

The Court also ruled in Vermont v. Brillon that that delays caused by a succession of new public defenders being assigned to a criminal case don’t violate a defendant’s right to a speedy trial. More here from Lawyers USA.

In Bartlett v. Strickland, a case that will have remifications for local lawmakers seeking to redraw district lines after the 2010 Census, the Court held that voting districts must have a minority population of at least 50 percent to qualify for protection under the Voting Rights Act. More here from AP.

And in Kansas v. Colorado, the Court held that the same expert witness fees are available in federal district court cases are available in cases brought under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.

The Court also added a new case to its docket, agreeing to decide whether an investor can bring a claim of excessive fees by an investment advisor under § 36(b) of the Investment Company Act. More here from SCOTUSBlog.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: