Pashman Stein Walder Hayden P.C. Named New Jersey Law Journal’s Law Firm of the Year 2023*

PDF

David Cinotti Tapped by Media Outlets for Commentary on U.S. Supreme Court Decision Resolving Circuit Split on Federal Arbitration Act

News
5.23.24

David N. Cinotti, partner at Pashman Stein Walder Hayden P.C., provided commentary to several media outlets regarding a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, Smith v. Spizzirri, in which the Court resolved a circuit split on an important procedural issue under the Federal Arbitration Act (the FAA): when a district court determines that a dispute filed in court is covered by an arbitration agreement, must it stay the litigation or can it dismiss the case?  The U.S. Supreme Court interpreted Section 3 of the FAA to require a stay and not to permit dismissal.

As quoted in Bloomberg Law:
When a court sends a case to arbitration, a worker whose case is dismissed can file an immediate appeal to keep the case in court, said David N. Cinotti, a partner at Pashman Stein Walder Hayden PC. In contrast, an order staying a case pending the outcome of arbitration isn’t a final ruling that’s appealable under the FAA, so the plaintiff must go through the private proceeding before challenging the determination that the dispute is subject to arbitration in the first place, he said.

“The importance of this is really the advantage it gives to parties seeking arbitration,” Cinotti said. “It’s kind of a one-sided … appeal right.”

He said: “This is a really helpful decision to insulate rulings from immediate appeal.”

As quoted in Law360:
For the party that prevails on a motion to compel arbitration, not requesting a stay "would be, in my view, a big strategic mistake ... because it gives away the benefit of the Smith decision," Cinotti said. "A stay [rather than a dismissal] is much better for a party seeking arbitration because it insulates them from an appeal."

As quoted in Commercial Dispute Resolution:
Litigation partner David Cinotti of New Jersey litigation and real estate firm Pashman Stein Walder Hayden said of the verdict: “This is an important pro-arbitration decision because it means that a district court’s order that a dispute is covered by an arbitration agreement cannot be immediately appealed, absent certification of a controlling issue of law by the district court for appeal, a very unusual circumstance.”

Cinotti has a wealth of experience in litigating issues under the Federal Arbitration Act and has written extensively on the statute, which you can read more about here.

To read the Bloomberg Law article, click here.

To read the Law360 article, click here.

To read the Commercial Dispute Resolution article, click here.

Related Attorneys

Jump to Page

Pashman Stein Walder Hayden P.C. Cookie Preference Center

Your Privacy

When you visit our website, we use cookies on your browser to collect information. The information collected might relate to you, your preferences, or your device, and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to and to provide a more personalized web experience. For more information about how we use Cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Always Active

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. These cookies may only be disabled by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Functional Cookies

Always Active

Some functions of the site require remembering user choices, for example your cookie preference, or keyword search highlighting. These do not store any personal information.

Form Submissions

Always Active

When submitting your data, for example on a contact form or event registration, a cookie might be used to monitor the state of your submission across pages.

Performance Cookies

Performance cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.

Powered by Firmseek