| Syllabus | Opinion [ Breyer ] | Dissent [ Rehnquist ] | Dissent [ Thomas ] | Other [ Stevens ] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version |
GREEN TREE FINANCIAL CORP., nka CONSECO FINANCE CORP., PETITIONER v. LYNN W.
BAZZLE, etc., et al.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
[June 23, 2003]
Justice Thomas, dissenting.
I continue to believe that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., does not apply to proceedings in state courts. Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265, 285—297 (1995) (Thomas, J., dissenting). See also Doctor’s Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto, 517 U.S. 681, 689 (1996) (Thomas, J., dissenting). For that reason, the FAA cannot be a ground for pre-empting a state court’s interpretation of a private arbitration agreement. Accordingly, I would leave undisturbed the judgment of the Supreme Court of South Carolina.