Gibson v. Williams

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that choice-of-law provision in arbitration clause covered arbitration, while general choice-of-law clause in contract covered the other rights and duties of the parties
• holding that punitive damages claims are subject to arbitration unless the contract exempts such claims from the coverage of the arbitration clause
• holding that an agreement that did not unambiguously limit the scope of arbitration by choosing a state-law rule did not effectively do so under the FAA
• holding that an agreement that did not unambiguously limit the scope of arbitration by choosing a state-law rule did not effectively do so under the FAA
• concluding that a provision that provided that “any controversy” arising out of transactions between the parties “shall be settled by arbitration” was a broad provision
• holding that a choice-of-law provision opting for New York law was not sufficient to annul an arbitrator’s award that was prohibited under New York law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).