Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter

Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, 569 U.S. 564 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that, under the limited judicial review allowed for decisions from binding arbitration, the sole question is whether the arbitrator arguably interpreted the parties' contract, not whether the arbitrator erred.^[1][2]

Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 10, 2013
Full case name	Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter
Citations	569 U.S. 564 (more)
Holding
Under the limited judicial review allowed for decisions from binding arbitation, the sole question is whether the arbitrator arguably interpreted the parties' contract, not whether the arbitrator erred.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority	Kagan, joined by unanimous
Concurrence	Alito, joined by Thomas
Laws applied
Federal Arbitration Act

Background

John Ivan Sutter, a pediatrician, provided medical services to Oxford Health Plans's insurance customers under a fee-for-services contract that required binding arbitration of contractual disputes. He nonetheless filed a proposed class action in New Jersey Superior Court, alleging that Oxford failed to fully and promptly pay him and other physicians with similar Oxford contracts. On Oxford’s motion, the court compelled arbitration. The parties agreed that the arbitrator should decide whether their contract authorized class arbitration, and he concluded that it did. Oxford filed a motion in federal court to vacate the arbitrator’s decision, claiming that he had "exceeded [his] powers" under §10(a)(4) of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The federal district court denied the motion, and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.^[1]

Opinion of the court

The Supreme Court issued an opinion on June 10, 2013.^[1]

Subsequent developments