Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: “Accidental Arbitration” -- A New Theory that Would Rein in Consumer Arbitration Clauses and the Scope of the FAA
#WorkforceWednesday®: PAGA in California, NLRB Authority, New Employment Laws in 2025 - Employment Law This Week®
Recent Developments in California's Arbitration Landscape — FCRA Focus Podcast
Dogecoin’s Day in Court
#WorkforceWednesday® - Key SCOTUS Decisions This Term for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 14: Resolving Cross-Border Conflicts Through International Arbitration
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Discussion of Industry and Consumer Perspectives on Mass Arbitration
Navigating Mass Arbitration: New Rules and Strategies — The Consumer Finance Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday: Avoiding Legal Illusions - Crafting Effective Arbitration Agreements - Employment Law This Week®
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Look at a New Approach to Consumer Contracts
Do You Need an Arbitration Clause in Your Energy Contract? Pros and Cons
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Reasons Why the CFPB Should Deny the Petition for Rulemaking on Post-Dispute Consumer Arbitration Agreements
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Deep Dive into Mass Arbitration, with Special Guest Andrew Pincus, Partner, Mayer Brown
#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
Employment Law Now VI-116-Top 10 Employment Issues To Consider For The Summer Kick-Off
3 Key Takeaways | Drafting & Navigating Dispute Resolution Clauses
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
Law Brief®: Jonathan Temchin and Richard Schoenstein Explore Arbitration
Hot Spots in Employment Law 2022
Arizona employer cannot exclude settlement communications from former employee’s retaliation complaint - In Flores v. Rafi Law Group PLLC, the plaintiff accused her law firm employer of retaliating against her by (i)...more
In another reversal of course, the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals cleared the way again for California employers to require arbitration agreements. The latest 2-1 decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta, issued on...more
A Ninth Circuit panel that previously upheld a California law prohibiting mandatory employment arbitration agreements in the workplace withdrew its decision and ordered the matter to be resubmitted for a panel rehearing. ...more
The panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that largely upheld California’s law banning mandatory arbitration agreements in the employment context just withdrew its decision. On August 22, 2022, two of the three...more
Businesses and attorneys alike have kept a close eye on the developments surrounding the challenge to California Assembly Bill 51 (now codified as Labor Code section 432.6). Most recently, in a 2-1 decision, the 9th Circuit...more
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated a preliminary injunction issued in January 2020 that prohibited California from enforcing Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”), which barred employers from requiring employees to sign...more
- The Ninth Circuit rules that portions of Assembly Bill 51 are not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) and lifts a lower court’s injunction that barred the law from taking effect. - The court did rule that...more
A federal district court found that the new California law barring mandatory employment arbitration agreements is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The court granted the challengers’ motion for preliminary...more
On February 7, 2020, United States District Court Judge Kimberly J. Mueller issued a decision explaining her prior order blocking enforcement of California's new law restricting arbitration agreements, AB 51. ...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Among other things, AB 51 makes it unlawful for employers to impose arbitration agreements on employees as a condition of employment, even if employees are permitted to opt out. AB 51 was quickly challenged...more
A federal court in Sacramento explained last week its rationale for temporarily barring the State of California from enforcing a new law, AB 51, that would curtail employment arbitration agreements. The rationale set forth in...more
As we wrote here, United States District Court Judge Kimberly J. Mueller of the Eastern District of California wrote a brief “minute order” explaining that she was issuing a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of...more
On February 7, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued an order supporting its injunction of Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), an expansive anti-arbitration law enacted in October, which was...more
On Friday, January 31, 2020, Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller of the federal District Court for the Eastern District of California issued a Preliminary Injunction (PI) against the State of California, enjoining the...more
On Friday January 31, 2020, Judge Kimberly Mueller of the Eastern District of California granted a preliminary injunction blocking the enforcement of California Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51) to the extent it applies to arbitration...more
On January 31, 2020, Judge Kimberly Mueller issued a preliminary injunction "in full" preventing the State of California from enforcing AB 51, the state's new law effectively banning mandatory employee arbitration...more
Here is the latest in a series of blogs about AB 51, the California bill that threatened mandatory arbitration. Thankfully, the District Court granted the preliminary injunction in full (not just temporarily), and stopped AB...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: After granting a temporary restraining order days before AB 51 was to go into effect, the Eastern District of California granted a motion for a preliminary injunction on January 31, 2020. An order detailing...more
U.S. District Court Judge Kimberly Mueller just granted a preliminary injunction to block Assembly Bill 51 throughout future court proceedings, which will examine the enforceability of the new law. This is welcome news for...more
A federal judge just extended the reprieve that permitted California employers to escape the grasp of a newly enacted law that aimed to prevent them from utilizing mandatory arbitration agreements with their employees. After...more
AB 51 is the California Bill which attempts to ban certain mandatory employment arbitration agreements. It was scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2020, but was temporarily enjoined on December 30, 2019, after a coalition...more
The temporary restraining order (“TRO”) which prevents the enforcement of AB 51 remains in effect until January 31, 2020. As a reminder, California’s AB 51 bars mandatory arbitration agreements in employment agreements....more
California AB 51’s ban on mandatory employment arbitration remains stayed for now. AB 51 was passed in fall 2019 and essentially prohibits employers from requiring an applicant or employee to consent to mandatory arbitration...more
On December 30, 2019, a federal judge in the Eastern District of California entered an order temporarily halting the enforcement of AB 51, California’s new anti-mandatory arbitration law. AB 51, which was set to go into...more
A coalition of business groups led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce just filed a lawsuit against California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and other state officials seeking to block AB 51, a recently passed statute which will...more