We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
Arbitration--Will The 'Offer You Can't Refuse' Include an Arbitration Clause? A look at RICO, Arbritration, and Shearson/American Express, Inc. v. McMahon.
- Authors
Thompson, Mark
- Abstract
On June 8, 1987, the United States Supreme Court decided Shearson/American Express, Inc. v. McMahon. At issue, in part, was whether the respondent's claim, brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), should be stayed and sent to arbitration in accordance with the terms of a valid arbitration agreement and the Federal Arbitration Act (Arbitration Act). Justice O'Connor, writing for a unanimous Court on an issue of first impression, held that domestic RICO claims are arbitrable, and remanded the case for arbitration. The purpose of this Comment is to explain and analyze the Court's decision in McMahon. This Comment proposes that the Court's holding in McMahon, although correct, should be limited to the facts involved. First, the Comment discusses RICO and the arbitration act and their interaction prior to McMahon. Second, the Comment summarizes the Court's analysis. Third, the Comment critiques the Court's analysis under the facts of McMahon. Last, the Comment demonstrates that the holding should not be extended to cases where a party would be forced to arbitrate with professional criminals who are members of organized crime.
- Subjects
UNITED States; LABOR arbitration; RACKETEERING
- Publication
Journal of Corporation Law, 1988, Vol 13, Issue 4, p1175
- ISSN
0360-795X
- Publication type
Article