holding that under Volt, "the parties are at liberty to include a choice of law provision in their agreement, and the parties' choice will be honored unless the chosen law creates a conflict with the terms of, or policies underlying, the FAA"
Summary of this case from Gramercy Capital Recovery Fund II LLC v. J.A. Green Dev. CorpNo. 94-1908.
October 2, 1995.
Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 85 N. Y. 2d 193, 647 N. E. 2d 1308.
holding that under Volt, "the parties are at liberty to include a choice of law provision in their agreement, and the parties' choice will be honored unless the chosen law creates a conflict with the terms of, or policies underlying, the FAA"
Summary of this case from Gramercy Capital Recovery Fund II LLC v. J.A. Green Dev. Corpholding that under Volt, "the parties are at liberty to include a choice of law provision in their agreement, and the parties' choice will be honored unless the chosen law creates a conflict with the terms of, or policies underlying, the FAA"
Summary of this case from Gramercy Capital Recovery Fund II LLC v. J.A. Green Dev. Corp.explaining that federal law governs the application of federal legislation in the absence of clear language to the contrary
Summary of this case from U.S. v. Valdez-ValdezFull title:MANHARD v. MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER SMITH, Inc., et al
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 2, 1995
Supreme Court initially granted the stay, relying on Matter of Smith Barney, Harris Upham Co. v Luckie ( 85…
Garcia v. United Parcel Service, Inc.The application of equitable doctrines, such as equitable tolling, rests in the sound discretion of the…