Marmet Health Care Center v. Brown (2011)
- Docket
- 11-391
- Decided
- 2011-01-01
Summary
Question: Did the state court err when it held that the arbitration clauses were invalid due to public policy? Conclusion: Yes. In a per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court vacated the prior judgment and remanded for further proceedings. The Court held that the West Virginia court interpreted the FAA incorrectly. The FAA requires a court to enforce agreements parties make to arbitrate, and contains no exception for personal injury or wrongful death claims. On remand, the West Virginia Court must consider whether state common law principles, which are not preempted by the FAA, make the arbitration agreements unenforceable. The court may not consider general public policy.