Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.
United States Supreme Court
473 U.S. 614, 105 S.Ct. 3346, 87 L.Ed.2d 444 (1985)
- Written by Ryan McCarthy, JD
Facts
Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. (Soler) (defendant) entered an agreement to sell cars in the San Juan area with Chrysler International, S.A. (CISA), a joint venture involving Chrysler and Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (Mitsubishi) (plaintiff). The agreement contained an arbitration clause to resolve disputes in Japan. Soler canceled orders for approximately 1,000 vehicles because of a downturn in sales. Mitsubishi sued in district court to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act. Soler counterclaimed with claims under various antitrust statutes, including the Sherman Act. The district court ordered all claims to be arbitrated. The court of appeals reversed the district court’s order to the extent it required the antitrust claims to be arbitrated. The appellate court adopted the holding of American Safety Equipment Corp. v. J.P. Maguire & Co., 391 F.2d 821 (2d Cir. 1968), which held that antitrust laws were not appropriate for arbitration.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
