Template:Did you know nominations/Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that, in Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court ordered a car dealer in Puerto Rico to arbitrate its Sherman Act case in Tokyo per a contract under Swiss law?

• ALT1:... that, in Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that Sherman Act antitrust claims could be arbitrated?
• Reviewed: Short No.1 biplane
• Comment: Sorry for not getting this in quite within five days of creation. The Easter holiday got in the way, and I wanted to make sure I reached the majority opinion so the hook could be verified, rather than wait till I finished what is as usual going to be another magnum opus on a Supreme Court case in what is admittedly an unexciting area of law.

Created/expanded by Daniel Case (talk). Self nom at 18:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

• A magnum opus indeed. Good to go. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:09, 22 April 2012 (UTC)