Document Type

Arguendo (Online)

Abstract

This Note analyzes a 2022 Fifth Circuit opinion concerning two issues: first, whether local delivery drivers are engaged in interstate commerce, and second, who decides challenges to arbitrability. In Lopez v. Cintas Corporation, the Fifth Circuit first held that local delivery drivers are not engaged in interstate commerce because they do not play a direct and necessary role in interstate commerce. Second, the court held that the arbitrator decides challenges to the validity of arbitrability when the challenge could also, if successful, attack the validity of the entire contract. The Fifth Circuit used incorrect reasoning, overemphasizing the crossing of borders with regard to the interstate commerce issue, and it incorrectly decided the arbitrability issue because it misunderstood the Supreme Court’s test. First, although the Fifth Circuit reached the right outcome for the local delivery driver at bar, its reasoning incorrectly overemphasized the crossing of borders, thereby implicitly excluding all local delivery drivers from engaging in interstate commerce. This reasoning is contrary to both the Supreme Court’s reasoning and the consensus among other circuit courts. Second, the court misunderstood the Supreme Court’s test to determine who decides arbitrability challenges, incorrectly conflating specifically challenging arbitration with uniquely challenging arbitration. This Note begins by explaining the background and procedural posture of Lopez. It then examines prior case law, analyzes the Lopez decision in light of the surrounding case law, and finally closes with a summary of the argument.

DOI

10.37419/LR.V11.Arg.2

First Page

Last Page

Recommended Citation

Kyle Chrisman, Lopez v. Cintas Corporation: Another Interstate Headache, 11 Tex. A&M L. Rev. Arguendo 7 (2024).
Available at: https://doi.org/10.37419/LR.V11.Arg.2