Goldman Sachs Bank USA, dba Marcus by Goldman Sachs, Petitioner v. Rhea Ann Brown, et al.

Goldman Sachs asks the Supreme Court to decide whether a bankruptcy court may refuse to enforce an arbitration agreement for Section 362(k) claims (bankruptcy claims seeking money damages). The case comes from the Fourth Circuit and is still at the certiorari (the Court's decision whether to hear the case) stage.

No oral argument is scheduled, and the Court has not yet said whether it will hear the case. Goldman argues the Federal Arbitration Act usually requires enforcement of arbitration agreements, while the Fourth Circuit background points the other way for Section 362(k) money-damages claims.

The answer could affect whether these disputes are heard by a bankruptcy judge or in private arbitration. For example, a consumer who agreed to arbitration with a bank could have a Section 362(k) claim sent to arbitration instead of bankruptcy court.

The case asks whether a bankruptcy court may refuse to enforce an arbitration agreement for a Section 362(k) claim. That would decide where some bankruptcy damages disputes must be heard.

Banks and consumers with arbitration agreements could be affected. The outcome could shape whether some disputes go before a bankruptcy judge or into private arbitration.

The justices must first decide whether to grant certiorari (agree to hear the case). No oral argument is scheduled yet, and no decision window is available.