Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Discussion of Industry and Consumer Perspectives on Mass Arbitration
California Employment News: The State of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in California Employment
Podcast: California Employment News - The State of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in California Employment
#WorkforceWednesday: NLRB Focuses on Severance Agreements, Supreme Court Opens Overtime to HCEs, Ninth Circuit Rejects CA's Mandatory Arbitration Ban - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: US Supreme Court “Viking River” Decision Brings PAGA Relief for CA Employers
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: New Law on Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Claims, Cyber War Ramps Up, Salaried Nonexempt Status - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VI-114-Banning Arbitration of Sexual Harassment/Assault Claims
Update and Discussion on Legal and Practical Issues
DE Under 3: OFCCP Contractor Portal & Request for Comments for Functional Affirmative Action Programs (FAAPs)
Employment Law This Week®: FAA Arguably Preempts California Law, New CA Employment Laws for 2020, CA Consumer Privacy Act Amended
Employee Who Wanted To Donate/Freeze Her Eggs Was Not Protected By Pregnancy Statute - Paleny v. Fireplace Products U.S., Inc., 103 Cal. App. 5th 199 (2024) - Erika Paleny alleged harassment, discrimination and...more
On May 16, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States (“SCOTUS”) unanimously held that when a district court finds that when a lawsuit involves an arbitrable dispute and a party has requested a stay of the court proceeding...more
Recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court in Smith v. Spizzirri, 601 U.S. 472 (2024) and Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski, 144 S. Ct. 1186 (2024) provide important guidance for companies utilizing arbitration clauses in their...more
On May 23, 2024, the United States Supreme Court decided Coinbase, Inc., v. Suski, No. 23-3, serving a reminder to companies with mandatory consumer-facing arbitration provisions that contractual consistency is a key to...more
The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires federal courts to enforce agreements to arbitrate that impact interstate commerce. The FAA and its body of case law are binding on state courts and many states have adopted similar...more
On May 16, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a unanimous decision in Smith v. Spizzirri. This decision brings much-needed clarity to the proper procedure for federal courts, when dealing with cases involving...more
What happens when a party required by contract to arbitrate a claim tries pursuing it in court, nonetheless? Should the case be dismissed? Or must the court hold the case on its docket while the parties seek resolution...more
The Supreme Court recently issued a pair of unanimous decisions clarifying how arbitration clauses impact litigation. One decision restricts a court’s discretion to dismiss—rather than stay—litigation after ordering the...more
It is generally understood, or at least it has been in the past, that plaintiffs prefer to avoid the application of the Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”) and instead present their cases to juries. As such, plaintiffs have...more
In 23-3 Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski (05/23/2024) (supremecourt.gov) (May 23, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court once again delved into the frequently litigated arena of arbitration agreements. Specifically, the Court considered...more
On May 23, 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that when parties have agreed to more than one contract – one that contains a clause sending threshold arbitrability questions to an arbitrator and one that sends those...more
Is the exemption from coverage under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) for any “class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce” limited to workers whose employers are in the transportation industry? ...more
On May 16, 2024, the Supreme Court, in Smith v. Spizzirri, unanimously held that Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires courts to stay, rather than dismiss, proceedings pending arbitration upon a party’s...more
In Smith v. Spizzirri, 2024 WL 2193872 (U.S. May 16, 2024), the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling holding that courts must stay, rather than dismiss, cases that are subject to arbitration. The unanimous decision...more
On May 16, 2024, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that, when enforcing an arbitration clause subject to the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), if any party requests a stay, the district court lacks discretion to...more
On May 16, 2024, in Smith v. Spizzirri, the Supreme Court of the United States resolved a long-standing circuit split that affects motions to compel arbitration in federal court. Specifically, the Court answered whether...more
Mandatory arbitration agreements remain popular for employers concerned about the cost, delays, and unpredictability of traditional litigation. The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires federal courts to defer in most...more
On May 16, 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously decided in Smith v. Spizziri that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. § 3, divests federal district courts of any discretion to dismiss arbitrable claims that are...more
When employers implement arbitration programs, they expect employees to file covered claims in arbitration – but employees often file those claims in court anyway. So, when an employee brings a claim to the courthouse that is...more
Last week, in Smith v. Spizzirri, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a federal court must grant a party’s request for a stay while arbitration is pending. In Spizzirri, a group of delivery drivers sued...more
On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that lawsuits involving an arbitrable dispute must be stayed upon the request of a party. Rather than dismiss the case, section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (the...more
In a short but unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court resolved a Circuit split by confirming that district courts have no discretion under section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to dismiss litigation. Rather, the...more
On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that where a district court is presented with a motion to stay and/or dismiss on the basis of an arbitration agreement, the plain language of the Federal Arbitration...more
“Shall” means “shall” in the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held in Smith v. Spizzirri, No. 22–1218 (May 16, 2024). The Court explained the language in the FAA providing a court “shall on...more
Executive Summary: On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Smith v. Spizzirri, holding that federal district courts have no discretion under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act (“the FAA”) to dismiss a case once...more