Court Opinion

ID: 9516528
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 23:44:29.722476+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:29.277598
License: Public Domain

M. J. Kelly, J.
(concurring). I find the federal arbitration act, 9 USC 1 et seq., wholly inapplicable to these state court proceedings. Plaintiff has failed to cite any state court decisions wherein the federal arbitration act was applied, and those sections of the act providing for vacating, modifying, or correcting an award begin:
*734"In either of the following cases the United States court in and for the district wherein the award was made may make an order * * *.” 9 USC 10, 11.
The three-month notice provision contained, such language as "resdient of the district” and "served by the marshal”. 9 USC 12. It appears that the federal arbitration act was not intended to supersede state arbitration statutes but to provide federal courts with the necessary powers to enforce and adjudicate arbitration agreements affecting admiralty or commerce. I believe that if plaintiff considered herself to have been proceeding under the federal arbitration act she should have proceeded with her motion to vacate in the federal district court.