WebNitro-Lift Technologies, L.L.C., Petitioner v. Eddie Lee Howard, et al. Docketed: May 16, 2012 Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Oklahoma Web26 de nov. de 2012 · Arbitrator should have been allowed to determine from outset whether covenants not to compete were valid under Oklahoma law (per curiam)

U.S. Supreme Court swats case back to arbitration - Lexology

WebNITRO-LIFT TECHNOLOGIES, L. L. C. v. HOWARD Per Curiam. The Oklahoma Supreme Courts decision disregards this Courts precedents on the FAA. That Act, which de clare[s] a national policy favoring arbitration, Southland Corp. v. Keating, 465 U. S. 1, 10 (1984), ... http://www.margarethuffmediation.com/2014_Archive_-_US_S_Ct_-_arb.pdf christe chen pharmacist

Eddie Howard and Shane D. Schneider worked as employees of...

WebNitro–Lift Technologies, L.L.C., and two of its former employees. Nitro–Lift contracts with operators of oil and gas wells to provide services that enhance production. Respondents … WebNitro-Lift: Arbitrators in the First Instance, not Courts, Decide Validity of Underlying Contract In its per curiam decision in Nitro-Lift Technologies v. Howard, 133 S.Ct. 500 (2012), the Supreme Court vacated the Oklahoma Supreme Court decision that a non-compete contract with an arbitration clause was void under state law. WebNitro-Lift Technologies, L.L.C. v. Howard, 133 S.Ct. 500 (2012) 184 L.Ed.2d 328, 81 USLW 3281, 81 USLW 3286, 81 USLW 4011... © 2013 Thomson Reuters. george brown print