The Federal Arbitration Act is a United States federal statute enacted in 1925 that governs arbitration in contracts implicating interstate commerce. The Act applies in both federal and state courts.
In recent years, employers have faced increased, and increasingly expensive, class action litigation from current and former employees. In response, many employers have turned to arbitration agreements with class-action...more
Court disagrees with the National Labor Relations Board’s D.R. Horton holding that arbitration agreements with a class/collective action waiver violate the National Labor Relations Act if the agreement is a condition of...more
On December 3, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) ruling that an employer violates the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by requiring employees to...more
Arbitration is quickly becoming a major vehicle to resolve individual employee disputes. Now another obstacle to enforcing those arbitration agreements and class action waivers may have been removed.
Employers can avoid class claims by entering agreements that require individual arbitration, but they should review those agreements to ensure that they contain clear exceptions for employees’ right to pursue unfair labor...more
In a major win for employers, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, on December 3, 2013, rejected the highly controversial D.R. Horton, Inc. decision from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
The American Arbitration Association and its related International Centre for Dispute Resolution announced on November 1, 2013 the adoption of new Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules. These new rules provide detailed...more
A federal district court denied a motion to compel arbitration for claims for injunctive relief under California’s unfair competition law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and false advertising law but granted the motion as to...more
California Supreme Court reverses rule that first required administrative hearing by state Labor Commissioner before permitting arbitration of wage and hour claims -
In 2011, the California Supreme Court in...more
Just last week Mintz Levin presented a webinar on how employers can use arbitration agreements as a tool to avoid exposure to wage and hour and other class actions. The thesis of the webinar was that recent Supreme Court and...more
The Federal Arbitration Act sets forth only four bases for vacating arbitration awards. See 9 U.S.C. § 10 (a). After SCOTUS’s 2008 decision in Hall Street, at least half of the circuit courts have concluded that those four...more
In AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the United States Supreme Court analyzed whether a court could refuse to enforce an arbitration agreement because the terms are “unconscionable,” meaning that one party did not have meaningful...more
As we have reported on several occasions, a string of United States Supreme Court cases over the past few years has strengthened the use and applicability of arbitration provisions in contracts. For example, in AT&T Mobility...more
In light of the United States Supreme Court decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, the California Supreme Court recently reversed its own prior decision where it had held that an arbitration agreement that requires an...more
Two recent Ninth Circuit opinions and a California Supreme Court ruling demonstrate that the debate over the enforceability of consumer arbitration provisions is far from over. With the U.S. Supreme Court weighing whether to...more
Almost one year after the U.S. Supreme Court summarily vacated the original 2011 Sonic-Calabasas opinion (Sonic I), the California Supreme Court issued its opinion on remand in Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno (Sonic II)....more
In This Issue:
- What Law Applies to Arbitration Clauses?
- What Do You Have to Prove?
- How Have Courts Treated Motions to Compel Arbitration?
- Do You Want to Enforce Your Arbitration?
- What Should...more
On October 17, the Supreme Court of California held that, while the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts a California state-law rule categorically prohibiting waiver of state pre-arbitration protections in arbitration...more
On October 17, 2013, the California Supreme Court revisited the enforceability of arbitration agreements in California. The Court released its decision Sonic-Calabasas Inc. v. Moreno (Sonic II). In that 5 – 2 ruling, the...more
In Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno (Sonic II), the California Supreme Court addressed an employee’s waiver of access to an administrative hearing, in this case a Berman hearing, in an arbitration agreement imposed as a...more
Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno, No. S174475, (October 17, 2013): As expected following the recent decision by the Supreme Court of the United States interpreting the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), the California Supreme...more
Why it matters: Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno (“Sonic II”) presents a mixed bag for employers. While the California Supreme Court reversed itself, acknowledging that the waiver of a Berman hearing is not per se...more
On October 17, 2013, in Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno, the California Supreme Court issued a 73-page decision (excluding concurrence and dissent) that attempted to construe the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Federal...more
Enforcing copyrights in the Federal Courts can be both expensive and complicated, so much so that many feel copyright law Is virtually unenforceable except by large corporations. Filing a copyright claim for anything under...more
For banking executives and in-house counsel, arbitration can be a preferable alternative to litigation to avoid costly trials and home-town advantages. In this article, we highlight four recent court decisions that affect the...more