Andrea C. Chandrasekher & David Horton, Arbitration Nation: Data from Four Providers, 107 Cal. L. Rev. 1 (2019). 

• This Article sharpens our understanding of the pervasive and polarizing institution of arbitration by reporting the results of an empirical study of 40,775 cases filed in four major arbitration providers between 2010 and 2016 (available at California Law Review).

David Horton, Arbitration about Arbitration, 70 Stan. L. Rev. 363 (2018). 

• This article discusses the rise of, and reasoning behind, “delegation clauses.” The author explores and challenges the current understanding of the legal theory animating these clauses (available at SRRN).

Erin O’Hara O’Conner, et al. Customizing Employment Arbitration, 98 Iowa L. Rev. 133 (2012). 

• In this Article, the authors study the arbitration clauses found in a random sample of 910 Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) employment contracts entered into during the time period from 1995 to 2005 to determine how much customization actually takes place. We find only a small number of instances where fine-grained customization has occurred (available at Florida State Scholarship Repository).

Salvatore U. Bonaccorso, State Court Resistance to Federal Arbitration Law, 67 Stan. L. Rev. 5 (2015).  

• Discusses the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Concepcion and explores potential FAA preemption of state contract law (available at Stanford Law Review). 

Jean R. Sternlight, Forum Shopping for Arbitration Decisions: Federal Courts’ Use of Antisuit Injunctions Against State Courts, 147 U. Pa. L. Rev. 91 (1998). 

• Federal courts have, on quite a few occasions, gone so far as to enjoin a state court from continuing to consider a pending case because the federal court concluded that the matter ought to be arbitrated. This Article thus attempts to determine when, if ever, federal courts should be permitted to enjoin state court determinations in order to allow arbitration to proceed (available at UNLV Boyd Law Scholarly Commons).

• Duke has compiled the best research guide on the law of arbitration to date. Their guide provides an overview of materials relating both to domestic and international arbitration. 

Loyola Law Library - Dispute Resolution Research Guide: Arbitration 

• This guide provides arbitration resources in two groups: 1) basic texts and 2) practice guides 

Ashlyn Smith & Ellen Adams, Mandatory Arbitration After Epic: A Quick Guide For Employers, Tulsa Lawyer Magazine (2021). 

• Written by an Oklahoma law firm and published in Tulsa Lawyer Magazine, this source contains fantastic discussion of the way Epic altered the field of class waivers. (Available on google). 

James Dawson, Contract After Concepcion: Some Lessons from the State Courts, 124 Yale L.J. 1 (2014). 

• This article explores the Concepcion decision and the federal preemption of state contract law under the FAA (Available at Yale Law Journal).

Christopher R. Drahozal, FAA Preemption After Concepcion, 35 Berkeley J. Emp. & Lab. L. 153 (2014).  

• This Note explores the Concepcion decision and argues that the effect of Concepcion has been overstated, including its effect on application of state unconscionability doctrine to arbitration clauses. It concludes that Concepcion does not preempt all or even most state unconscionability doctrine as applied to arbitration agreements (Available at SSRN).

Michael Z. Green, Retaliatory Employment Arbitration, 35 Berkeley J. Emp. & Lab. L. 201 (2014). 

• This article critiques the use of mandatory arbitration for federal employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and examines the EEOC v. Waffle House decision and its aftermath (available at Texas A&M Law Library).

Kendra Robbins, Ethical Issues in Employment Arbitration, 34 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 1261 (2021). 

• This work examines the rise of arbitration in the American judicial system, highlighting policy issues that hinder fair justice. It proposes expanded self-governance by arbitration associations, including a more comprehensive sanctions process to address bias or misconduct, to ensure fairness and public trust while maintaining independence from excessive judicial review (available at Georgetown Legal Ethics Journal).