Posted on 03/19/2011 8:42:14 PM PDT by Mgm3com
Yes but isn’t arbitration suppose to secular in nature. Arbitration while yes is outside of the court system and part of contracts that people agree upon but the arbitration is still based on the laws in the jurisdiction the contract was drafted.
Yes contracts are binding in this country with serious consequences but they also are only binding if legal! Contracts have to be within the laws of the jurisdiction.
We don’t subject Catholic institutions to Canon Law in this country. I do not know of any Catholic institutions or individuals that have litigated an issue under a Catholic arbitration system. Correct me if I am wrong though.
A nice breath of fresh air.
The choice of law doctrine essentially says that any body of law (including a religious body of law) can be used in the contract, and/or in private arbitration.
"but the arbitration is still based on the laws in the jurisdiction the contract was drafted."
Right, unless something else is stipulated in the contract, as it must have been here.
"Yes contracts are binding in this country with serious consequences but they also are only binding if legal! Contracts have to be within the laws of the jurisdiction."
Federal law (Federal Arbitration Act) demands that state court adhere to arbitration stipulations in contract law.
"We don’t subject Catholic institutions to Canon Law in this country."
Catholic & Jewish laws are FREQUENTLY stipulated in contract as a choice of law. If you're doing business in Israel as an American company, or if your doing business in the US with Israeli companies, I promise you that you're going to be signing some contracts that stipulate binding arbitration that applies Jewish law in that binding arbitration. It happens everyday in courts all across the country.
In addition to business contract law, some marriage contracts (and other family law agreements) will stipulate certain religious laws be applied. This is a bit more complicated, so I won't go into it, but it happens. A lot.
Been a long time since I said, “saw it off and let it float away.” seems apropos again.
This might be one of the dumbest judges ever.
frantzie, frantzie frantzie .. you are one tedious son of a gun
You know, I saw what probably was the fourth thread (of five) and within, perhaps 2 minutes, had determined this was primarily a decision about an arbitration path for the litigants. Titles of threads seem to be enough information for far too many people.
You sir have more sense than most on this thread.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.