Case Citator › Doscher v. Sea Port Group Securities, LLC

Doscher v. Sea Port Group Securities, LLC

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Second Circuit
Citation
832 F.3d 372
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
40 of 40
Citing cases (total)
40
Treatment dates
2022
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Badgerow v. Walters abrogated Doscher's rule allowing federal courts to look through petitions to vacate arbitration awards under the Federal Arbitration Act to find jurisdiction in the underlying dispute. The Supreme Court held that jurisdiction over petitions under §§ 9 and 10 must be established from the application itself.
More on how this was screened

All 40 flagged citations have been read, and the confirmed treatment is listed below. Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries also identifies Badgerow as the decision that abrogated Doscher on this point.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

40 later cases cite Doscher v. Sea Port Group Securities, LLC; 40 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Doscher v. Sea Port Group Securities, LLC?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court rejected Doscher's look-through approach to jurisdiction over petitions to vacate arbitration awards under FAA § 10.

    Badgerow v. Walters · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    We hold it does not. Those sections lack Section 4’s distinctive language directing a look-through, on which Vaden rested. Without that statutory instruction, a court may look only to the application actually submitted to it in assessing its jurisdiction.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Doscher v. Sea Port Group Securities, LLC and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace