| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Byrd ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Byrd
''Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Byrd'', , is a United States Supreme Court case concerning arbitration. It arose from an interlocutory appeal of a lower court's denial of brokerage firm Dean Witter Reynolds' motion to compel arbitration of the claims under state law made against it by an aggrieved former client. The Court held unanimously that the Federal Arbitration Act required that those claims be heard that way when the parties were contractually obligated to do so, even where parallel claims made under federal law would still be heard in federal court.
Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote for the court, resolving a conflict between the appellate circuits; Byron White added a concurrence in which he noted some issues with the underlying securities law that were not before the Court but, he felt, could in future cases make it harder for parties such as Byrd to claim that federal law always allowed them to litigate private actions for securities fraud. In the aftermath of the decision many district courts followed his opinion, leading to later Supreme Court rulings that greatly favored arbitration over litigation in securities disputes. It has been described as completing the federalization of American arbitration law.〔Hirshman, Linda; "The Second Arbitration Trilogy: The Federalization of Arbitration Law", 71 Va. L. Rev. 1305 (1985).〕
==Underlying dispute==
In 1981 A. Lamar Byrd, a dentist in Southern California, sold his practice and invested the $160,000 proceeds with Dean Witter Reynolds, a retail brokerage firm. Over the next several months his account lost more than half its value; he alleged that his broker represented to him that the account was profiting.〔''(Byrd v. Dean Witter Reynolds )'', 726 F. 2d 552, 553 (9th Cir., 1984).〕 Byrd claimed that the broker was using his account to churn, or making trades primarily to generate commissions for himself.〔Durrer, Michael; (Enforcing Arbitration of Federal Securities Law Claims: The Effect of ''Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Byrd'' ) 28 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 335, 344 (1987).〕
His client agreement with Dean Witter included a standard arbitration clause, by which the parties agreed to use that method to settle any disputes. However, it was limited by the Supreme Court's 1953 holding in ''Wilko v. Swan'', another case in which an investor had sued a broker alleging fraud and the broker had responded with a motion to compel contractually mandated arbitration per the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) passed in 1925. The plaintiff had sued under the Securities Act of 1933, under which any provision mandating that an investor waive their right to sue was prohibited. A 7–2 majority found the latter statute was controlling.〔''Wilko v. Swan'', .〕
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Byrd」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|