What's Fair Is Fair: Tribal Assertions of Jurisdiction over Arbitration Decisions

Authors

Matthew E. Terry

Abstract

While the modem trend is to provide tribes with a certain amount of latitude in some areas, the court in First Specialty Insurance Corp. v. Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon was tasked with shoehorning the facts into the applicable precedent because the various doctrines defining the limits of tribal jurisdiction under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") have not often been tested, as they were here. The district court's opinion followed the modem trend by upholding the Tribe's assertion of its court system's jurisdiction, yet the court did not establish a precedent that should trouble the notion of a fair system of arbitration.

Recommended Citation

Matthew E. Terry, What's Fair Is Fair: Tribal Assertions of Jurisdiction over Arbitration Decisions, 2009 J. Disp. Resol. (2009)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2009/iss1/12