Originally from Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation

PAGE PREVIEW

In recent months, several federal judges have expressed concerns about the fairness of arbitration as an alternative to litigation in U.S. courts.

In his opinion in Cellinfo LLC v. American Tower Corp., No. 18-11250-WGY (D. Mass. Dec. 19) (available at http://bit.ly/2txZpLg), Massachusetts U.S. District Court Judge William G. Young took the opportunity to speak directly to readers on this topic in colorful dictum, ending his opinion with a section titled “Whatever Were They Thinking? Myths and Realities Concerning Courts and Arbitration.”

This opinion approaches arbitration with a significant degree of skepticism, to put it mildly. “How could an otherwise sophisticated agreement have made such a hash out of the parties’ intentions concerning the interplay of arbitration and court processes?” asks Young.