No. 23-1066
Continuing Care Risk Retention Group, Inc. v. Jacob Benson, et al.
Amici (1)
Tags: arbitration arbitration-rights civil-procedure federal-arbitration-act federal-preemption insurance-business insurance-regulation liability-risk-retention-act mccarran-ferguson-act preemption risk-retention-groups statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Arbitration Securities Privacy
Arbitration Securities Privacy
Latest Conference:
2024-05-23
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can Arizona's anti-arbitration garnishment statute reverse preempt the Liability Risk Retention Act of 1986 as to divest foreign risk retention groups of their contractually bargained for right to arbitration?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED Can Arizona’s anti-arbitration garnishment statute A.R.S. § 12-1584, which itself violates the Federal Arbitration Act, reverse preempt the Liability Risk Retention Act of 1986, 15 U.S.C. § 3901 et seq. as to divest foreign risk retention groups operating in Arizona of their contractually bargained for right to arbitration as a means of resolving insurance coverage disputes?
Docket Entries
2024-05-28
Petition DENIED.
2024-05-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2024.
2024-05-07
Reply of petitioner Continuing Care Risk Retention Group, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
2024-05-01
Brief amicus curiae of National Risk Retention Association filed.
2024-04-23
Brief of respondents Jacob Benson, et al. in opposition filed.
2024-03-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 1, 2024)
Attorneys
Continuing Care Risk Retention Group, Inc.
Michael J. Schroeder — Michael J. Schroeder P.C., Petitioner
Michael J. Schroeder — Michael J. Schroeder P.C., Petitioner
Jacob Benson, et al.
David R. Schwartz — Udall Shumway, PLC, Respondent
David R. Schwartz — Udall Shumway, PLC, Respondent
National Risk Retention Association
Joseph Edmund Deems — Deems Law Offices, APC, Amicus
Joseph Edmund Deems — Deems Law Offices, APC, Amicus