Thomas E. Carbonneau holds the Samuel P. Orlando Distinguished Professorship at Penn State Law and directs The Penn State Institute on Arbitration Law and Practice. In his thirty-year career in law teaching, he has taught law and arbitration at Tulane University, Fordham, McGill, University of Denver, Hamline Dispute Resolution Institute, and University of California at Davis. He is a former Editor-in-Chief of the World Arbitration and Mediation Report and is the author of nearly twenty books and numerous articles on law and arbitration. He is the faculty adviser for the Penn State Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation and its Vis Moot Court team.
The willingness of any national legal system to endorse the process of arbitral adjudication can be measured by whether its governing statutory law and accompanying case law sustain the validity of arbitration agreements and limit judicial supervision of arbitral proceedings and awards—in effect, whether the laws of a nation establish a cooperative relationship between the courts and the arbitral process.1 On both scores, United States law on arbitration evinces a clear determination to support the process. The development of the law has given the framework of arbitral adjudication its necessary systemic autonomy.2
Table of Contents:
Chapter 3. The Reception of Arbitration in United States Law
I. Introduction II. The Early View of Arbitration III. Arbitration Rehabilitated IV. The International Case Law V. The Fusion of Doctrine VI. Conclusions