Local 771, I.A.T.S.E., Afl-Cio, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Rko General, Inc., Wor Division, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that agreement stating “the parties may submit to arbitration” triggers mandatory arbitration and that “the word ‘may’ [does not] impl[y] that the parties had the option of invoking some remedy other than arbitration”
• stating that arbitration is mandatory despite the use of the word “may” in the arbitration clause of a CBA
• erroneously citing to § 301 case law in holding that vacatur is appropriate under § 10(a)(4
• “The parties may submit to arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association upon written request of either party[.]”
• using federal labor-law to uphold an arbitrator’s award
• \may submit to arbitration\ is mandatory

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).