The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Wednesday, October 9, 2002
Decision: Tuesday, December 10, 2002
Issues: Economic Activity, Arbitration

Advocates

Alan C. Friedberg (Argued the cause for the petitioners)
Matthew D. Roberts (Argued the case as amicus curiae, supporting the petitioners)
Kenneth W. Starr (Argued the cause for the respondent)

Facts of the Case

According to Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.'s standard client agreement, Karen Howsam chose to arbitrate her dispute with the company before the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD). NASD's Code of Arbitration Procedure section 10304 states that no dispute "shall be eligible for submission...where six (6) years have elapsed from the occurrence or event giving rise to the dispute." Dean Witter filed suit, asking the Federal District Court to declare the dispute ineligible for arbitration because it was more than six years old. The court dismissed the action, stating that the NASD arbitrator should interpret and apply the NASD rule. In reversing, the Court of Appeals found that the rule's application presented a question of the underlying dispute's arbitrability and the presumption is that a court will ordinarily decide an arbitrability question.

Question

Should a federal district court decide whether to interpret and apply the National Association of Securities Dealers' time-limit rule regarding disputes where six years have elapsed since the event that gives rise to the dispute?

Conclusion

No. In an 8-0 opinion delivered by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, the Court held that the applicability of the NASD time-limit rule is a matter presumptively for the arbitrator. Justice Breyer reasoned that the issue did not raise a substantive question of arbitrability requiring judicial resolution. The NASD's time-limit rule "falls within the class of gateway procedural disputes that do not present what our cases have called 'questions of arbitrability.' And the strong pro-court presumption as to the parties' likely intent does not apply," concluded Justice Breyer. Justice Clarence Thomas concurred in the judgment. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 8 votes for Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 0 vote(s) against
Did not participate
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Wrote a special concurrence
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Wrote the majority opinion
Breyer
Full Opinion by Justice Stephen G. Breyer

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79 (2002),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2002/2002_01_800/>
(last visited ).