October Term 2015 · Docket 14-462

Does Federal Law Override State Court Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses?

DirectV seeks to enforce an individual arbitration clause. Imburgia argues state law bars class arbitration.

Official caption
Directv, Inc. v. Imburgia
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — 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.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    DirectV's counsel argued the lower court violated federal law.

    Imburgia's counsel cited prior Supreme Court precedent on arbitration scope.

    Justices questioned the role of state law in federal preemption.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

DirectV wants a federal court to enforce its individual arbitration clause. Imburgia wants a state court to apply state law and allow class arbitration.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 6, 2015.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

DirectV wants the Court to enforce the individual arbitration clause.

Imburgia wants the Court to uphold the state court's interpretation.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

DirectV argues the Federal Arbitration Act requires enforcing the clause.

Imburgia argues state contract law controls the interpretation.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Alito asked if federal law applies to scope disputes.

Justice Sotomayor asked which contract principle disfavors arbitration.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the boundary between state and federal contract law. It determines how courts interpret arbitration clauses. It affects consumer rights in class actions. It shapes the enforceability of arbitration agreements nationwide.

Official sources for this section

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 Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON