Arbitration Agreements, Expanded Judicial Review, and Preemption – Hall Street Associates and NAFTA Traders, Inc. – A National Debate with International Implications

J. Keaton Grubbs, Justin Blount, Kyle Post

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle


On May 13, 2011, the Texas Supreme Court, in construing the Texas Arbitration Act, rejected the U. S. Supreme Court’s analysis in Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. 1 At issue was whether the parties may by agreement expand judicial review of an arbitration award beyond the specific grounds for vacatur or modification set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act. In NAFTA Traders, Inc. v. Quinn2 the Texas Supreme Court held that the Texas Arbitration Act does not preclude the parties from supplementing judicial review by contract. A discussion on the reasoning of the Texas Court and others that have addressed this issue, together with implications, is vital to moving forward with contractual arbitration domestically and internationally.

Original languageUndefined/Unknown
JournalFaculty Publications
StatePublished - Apr 1 2014

Cite this