Massachusetts - Chapter 10 - Interim Measures in the United States in Aid of Arbitration

Christopher Modlish is an Assistant Attorney General in the Energy and Telecommunications Division of the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office. His practice is primarily focused on proceedings before the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities. Prior to joining the Attorney General’s Office, he was an associate in Foley Hoag’s Litigation Department, where he worked on general litigation matters, complex commercial disputes, and white collar crime and government investigations.

Daniel Schimmel is a partner in Foley Hoag's International Litigation and Arbitration Department, resident in New York. He leads the international arbitration and litigation practice of Foley Hoag’s New York office. Mr. Schimmel has served as Chair, Sole Arbitrator, Co-Arbitrator, Emergency Arbitrator, Appellate Arbitrator, and counsel in international arbitrations arising from a broad range of contracts and transactions, including construction and infrastructure projects, patent license agreements, joint development agreements, mergers and acquisitions, shareholders’ agreements, joint venture agreements, business consulting agreements, distribution agreements, services agreements, licensing agreements, management agreements, and employment agreements of key executives.

Shrutih Tewarie focuses her practice at Foaley Hoag on U.S. and international disputes, investigations, and compliance. Ms. Tewarie represents international and national companies in a variety of litigation matters, including breaches of contract, business torts, intellectual property disputes, products liability cases, and class action matters. She also represents foreign sovereign governments and their instrumentalities in U.S. court litigation and international arbitration, including in investment treaty disputes before international tribunals

PDF751.29 KB

$40.00

Description:

Originally from Interim Measures in the United States in Aid of Arbitration

PREVIEW

RELIEF PROVIDED BY COURTS

1. Are courts in your state authorized to issue orders of attachment, injunctions or other provisional orders with respect to arbitration proceedings?

Yes, courts in Massachusetts are authorized to issue provisional orders with respect to arbitration proceedings. Arbitration in Massachusetts is governed by the Massachusetts Uniform Arbitration Act, G.L.c. 251, §§ 1, et seq. (“MUAA”). While this Act does not expressly address provisional relief, Massachusetts courts have interpreted the Act to allow for court-ordered provisional relief in aid of arbitration.

This common law precedent was established in Salvucci v. Sheehan, 349 Mass. 659, 663 (1965). In that case, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) upheld a trial court’s order that granted the plaintiff an equitable attachment of the defendant’s real estate pending arbitration, finding that the issuance of the relief did not “deprive the arbitrators of jurisdiction over the issues of law” because the property was solely “taken into the control of the court . . . for the security of the plaintiff.” Id. As such, the SJC explained that there was “no reason why the Superior Court should not have jurisdiction to bring the property in question within its control pending a determination of the issues of law under the procedure of the arbitration act.” Id. at 663. Since then, other Massachusetts courts have similarly granted court-ordered provisional relief in aid of arbitration. See, e.g., Hull Municipal Lighting Plant v. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co., 399 Mass. 640, 649 (1987) (granting preliminary injunction requiring a party to continue making payments pending arbitration); Danvers v. Wexler Constr. Co., 12 Mass. App. Ct. 160, 160 (1981) (motion to stay third-party legal proceedings granted pending outcome of a pending arbitration).