October Term 2008 · Docket 08-146
Can non-signatories enforce arbitration under federal law?
The dispute centers on whether state law allows non-parties to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Baker argued state law governs non-party rights.
Mr. De Marco argued estoppel applies without a contract.
questions_asked_by_justices
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 33-11 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 33-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-39
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 33-11 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 33-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 3, 2009.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want a federal stay of court proceedings.
the opposing sides want the case to proceed in court.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 33-11 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 33-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue state law determines non-party enforcement rights.
the opposing sides argue federal law bars non-party enforcement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 33-11 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 33-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia questioned if state law controls non-party enforcement.
Justice Ginsburg asked how the statute applies to non-parties.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-39
Why it matters
This case defines who can force arbitration. It affects business disputes and consumer contracts. It clarifies federal versus state power.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 33-11 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 33-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 35-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 35-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-39
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 33-11 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 33-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 33-11 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 33-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-21
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.