Shearman & Sterling LLP | U.S. International Arbitration Digest
U.S. International Arbitration Digest
This links to the home page

Welcome to the Shearman & Sterling US International Arbitration Digest

Shearman & Sterling’s US International Arbitration Digest (US IA Digest) provides a centralized resource for newly released decisions issued by US courts.

The US IA Digest collects in one place important decisions on US international arbitration case law issued since January 1, 2016, compiled and organized into categories that are most relevant and useful to practitioners and other interested parties. The Digest will be updated on a rolling basis as new decisions are issued.

Please click on the categories on the right to access the cited decisions. Cases are searchable by federal court and by topic.

Newly Released Decisions
04/15/2021

Cargill Inc. v. Triorient LLC, No. 20-CV-10058 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 15, 2021) 

Court granted petitioner’s motion to confirm a final arbitral award in a case relating to a breach of a charter party.  Court found no genuine factual dispute as to the propriety of the final award and duly confirmed. 

04/12/2021

Diaz v. Popular Securities, LLC, No. 3:19-CV-01065-JAG (D.P.R. Apr. 12, 2021) 

Court denied petitioner’s petition to vacate arbitration award and granted respondent’s cross-motion to confirm the award.  Court found that petitioner had failed to show fraud on the arbitral tribunal, partiality, or arbitrator misbehavior to justify vacating the award. 

04/12/2021

Balwin v. Beeche, No. 4:20-CV-00639-ALM (E.D. Tex. Apr. 12, 2021)

Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in a contract dispute.  Court held that the claims were within the scope of the arbitration agreement and plaintiffs could be compelled to arbitrate the case in Costa Rica. 

04/12/2021

Fort Washington Investment Advisors, Inc., v. Adkins, No. 1:19-CV-00685-DRC (S.D. Ohio Apr. 12, 2021)

Court denied defendants’ motion to compel arbitration.  Court rejected defendants’ arguments that equitable estoppel compelled arbitration and that plaintiff was an intended third-party beneficiary and therefore bound by the arbitration agreement.