The case that we did was Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Incorporated. This case involved the Hall Street Associates and Mattel Incorporated. Hall Street Associates had leased a manufacturing plant to Mattel Incorporated. Mattel didn’t clean up a water contamination problem that it had. Hall Street Associates sued Mattel to clean it up and look into why they weren’t cleaning it. The Supreme Court said that both of the parties had gone over their limits into looking in their defense. So the Supreme Court decided to put the case on hold to see how far they had gone over the FAA’s limits. The question was “Did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals err when it held, in conflict with several other Federal Courts of Appeals that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) precludes a federal court from enforcing the parties’ clearly expressed agreement providing for more expansive judicial review of an arbitration award than the narrow standard of review otherwise provided for in the FAA.      This case has not yet been decided and is still in the Supreme Court.

      We  feel that I am for this case to go through and pass through the court and put in limits in Judicial Review cases that involve the FAA. This would be good because that way in future cases they wouldn’t have to wait to find out if they had gone over the limit with the FAA in these types of cases. This would also solve our cases with the judicial review in the FAA. That’s why I am for it.