No. 19-72
PennyMac Financial Services, Inc., et al. v. Richard Smigelski
Response Waived
Tags: arbitration-agreement civil-procedure consent federal-arbitration-act legal-fiction preemption state-consent state-law state-party
Key Terms:
Arbitration WageAndHour Privacy ClassAction JusticiabilityDoctri
Arbitration WageAndHour Privacy ClassAction JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts a state-law rule that prohibits the enforcement of an arbitration agreement in a dispute covered by that agreement unless the State consents, based on the fiction that the State is a party to the lawsuit, when in fact it is not.
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts a statelaw rule that prohibits the enforcement of an arbitration agreement in a dispute covered by that agreement unless the State consents, based on the fiction that the State is a party to the lawsuit, when in fact it is not.
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-30
Waiver of right of respondent RICHARD SMIGELSKI to respond filed.
2019-07-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 14, 2019)
Attorneys
PENNYMAC FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.,, et al.
James Allen Bowles — Hill, Farrer & Burrill LL P, Petitioner
James Allen Bowles — Hill, Farrer & Burrill LL P, Petitioner
RICHARD SMIGELSKI
Christopher D. Baker — Baker Curtis & Schwartz, P.C., Respondent
Christopher D. Baker — Baker Curtis & Schwartz, P.C., Respondent