Reynolds, Inc. v. Byrd, 470 U.S. 213, 219-220, 105 S.Ct. 1238, 84 L.Ed.2d 158 (1985) for the proposition that the basic purpose of the FAA is to ensure judicial enforcement of privately made agreements to arbitrate). Choice of Law In determining whether the parties agreed to arbitrate a particular matter, courts are generally required to apply ordinary state law principles as to the formation of contracts. See First Options, 514 U.S. at 944, 115 S.Ct. 1920. See also Scott, 141 F.3d at 1011 (citing First Options, 514 U.S. at 944, 115 S.Ct. 1920); Employers Ins. of Wausau v. Bright Metal Specialties, Inc., 251 F.3d 1316, 1322 (11th Cir.2001) (“Federal law establishes the enforceability of arbitration agreements, while state law governs the interp 19 F.2d 1001, 1004 n. 1 (3d Cir.1980) (<HOLDING>); Schlumberger Tech. Corp. v. Blaker, 859 F.2d
holding that an objection was adequate when the judge cut short the objection and the defendant was not afforded the opportunity to explain his objection fully holding that party waived an objection to choice of law holding that appellant had waived any objection to an instruction that he had himself introduced and which was amended by the state without objection from appellant holding that parties waived any choice of law objection by not raising an objection holding that speculation objection as to expert testimony was waived where a different ground for objection was offered below