Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Denise A. Badgerow v. Greg Walters, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, No. 19-30766 · judgment September 15, 2020
Before the decision, about 4.8× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a Fifth Circuit decision below, and a circuit split argued in the petition.
Question presented
This case presents a clear and intractable conflict regarding an important jurisdictional question under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. 1-16. As this Court has repeatedly confirmed, the FAA does not itself confer federalquestion jurisdiction; federal courts must have an independent jurisdictional basis to entertain matters under the Act. In Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49 (2009), this Court held that a federal court, in reviewing a petition to compel arbitration under Section 4 of the Act, may "look through" the petition to decide whether the parties' underlying dispute gives rise to federal-question jurisdiction. In so holding, the Court focused on the particular language of Section 4, which is not repeated elsewhere in the Act. After Vaden, the circuits have squarely divided over whether the same "lookthrough" approach also applies to motions to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under Sections 9 and 10. In Quezada v. Bechtel OG & C Constr. Servs., Inc., 946 F.3d 837 (5th Cir. 2020), the Fifth Circuit acknowledged the 3-2 "circuit split," and a divided panel held that the "look-through" approach applies under Sections 9 and 10. In the proceedings below, the Fifth Circuit declared itself "bound" by that earlier decision, and applied the "look-through" approach to establish jurisdiction. That holding was outcomedeterminative, and this case is a perfect vehicle for resolving the widespread disagreement over this important threshold question. The question presented is: Whether federal courts have subject-matter jurisdiction to confirm or vacate an arbitration award under Sections 9 and 10 of the FAA where the only basis for jurisdiction is that the underlying dispute involved a federal question.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Daniel L. Geyser
Haynes and Boone, LLP
For respondent
Lisa S. Blatt
Williams & Connolly LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Amicus briefs
3 merits
(3 respondent)
Argument & decision
Argued November 2, 2021 — Daniel L. Geyser · Lisa S. Blatt. Audio and transcript
Decided March 31, 2022. Opinion by Kagan.
Proceedings
- May 02 2022JUDGMENT ISSUED.
- Mar 31 2022Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion.
- Nov 02 2021Argued. For petitioner: Daniel L. Geyser, Dallas, Tex. For respondents: Lisa S. Blatt, Washington, D. C.
- Oct 12 2021Reply of petitioner Denise A. Badgerow filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 21 2021CIRCULATED
- Sep 17 2021Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 17 2021Brief amicus curiae of Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association filed.(Distributed)
- Sep 17 2021Brief amicus curiae of Arbitration Scholar Imre Stephen Szalai filed. (Distributed)
- Sep 10 2021Brief of respondents Greg Walters, et al. filed.
- Sep 01 2021Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.
- Sep 01 2021The record from the U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit is electronic and availble on Pacer.
- Aug 16 2021ARGUMENT SET FOR Tuesday, November 2, 2021.
- Jul 22 2021Brief of petitioner Denise A. Badgerow filed.
- Jun 28 2021Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.
- Jun 17 2021Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Denise A. Badgerow.
- Jun 04 2021Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 22, 2021. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 10, 2021.
- May 28 2021Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.
- May 17 2021Petition GRANTED.
- May 10 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/13/2021.
- Apr 16 2021Reply of petitioner Denise A. Badgerow filed. (Distributed)
- Apr 14 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.
- Apr 05 2021Motion to delay distribution of the petition for a writ certiorari until April 14, 2021 granted.
- Apr 02 2021Motion of petitioner to delay distribution of the petition for a writ of certiorari under Rule 15.5 from April 7, 2021 to April 14, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Mar 24 2021Brief of respondents Greg Walters, et al. in opposition filed.
- Feb 12 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 24, 2021)