Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna

Docket No.: 04-1264
Certiorari Granted: Jun 20 2005
Argued: November 29, 2005
Decided: February 21, 2006

Topic:

Economic Activity

PartyNames: Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. John Cardegna, et al.
Petitioner: Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc.
Respondent: John Cardegna, et al.

Court Below: Supreme Court of Florida

Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc.
v.
John Cardegna, et al.
546 U.S. 440 (2006)
Question Presented:

Whether the Florida Supreme Court erred by holding, consistent with the Alabama Supreme Court but in direct conflict with six federal courts of appeals, that the Federal Arbitration Act allows a party to avoid arbitration by claiming that the underlying contract containing an arbitration clause (but not the arbitration clause itself) is void for illegality.

Question:

Under the Federal Arbitration Act, may a party avoid arbitration by arguing that the contract in which the arbitration clause is contained is illegal?

Holding: reversed and remanded
Vote: 7-1
Recused: Alito
Opinion By:
Read BUCKEYE CHECK CASHING V. CARDEGNA opinion (PDF)

Other Resources for Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna:
resource.org
justia.com
wikipedia.org