News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Arbitration Agreements

Littler

California High Court Limits Use of Formatting and “Fine Print” Arguments to Defeat Arbitration

Littler on

The California Supreme Court (the “Court”) has confirmed that an arbitration agreement’s formatting—standing alone—does not render its terms substantively unconscionable, even where the text is difficult to read.1 The Court...more

Thompson Coburn LLP

Fuentes v. Empire Nissan: Heightened Scrutiny for Arbitration Agreement Unconscionability

Thompson Coburn LLP on

In Fuentes v. Empire Nissan, Inc., the California Supreme Court recently issued an opinion calling on courts to “closely scrutinize” arbitration agreements for substantive unconscionability where there is extreme procedural...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

California High Court Says Contract Illegibility Warrants Increased Substantive Scrutiny

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The California Supreme Court held that illegibility and tiny font are matters of procedural, not substantive, unconscionability. However, courts must closely scrutinize the terms of hard-to-read agreements for unfairness, and...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

California Supreme Court “Clarifies” Standard for Enforcement of Illegible Arbitration Agreements

CDF Labor Law LLP on

In employment cases, Plaintiff’s claim that arbitration agreements with small or blurry print should not be enforced as substantively and procedurally unconscionable due to the difficulty in reading the words in the contract....more

Quarles & Brady LLP

California Supreme Court Addresses Enforceability of “Visually Impenetrable” Arbitration Provision

Quarles & Brady LLP on

On February 3, 2026, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Fuentes v. Empire Nissan, Inc. In this decision, which dealt with an illegible arbitration provision, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court and...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Arbitration Agreement’s Illegible Print Not Automatically Invalid as Unfair

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

The California Supreme Court held in Fuentes v. Empire Nissan, Inc. (Feb. 2, 2026) that small or blurry print in an arbitration agreement does not automatically invalidate the agreement as unconscionable. Instead, the Court...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

California Supreme Court Cases Employers Should Watch in 2026

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

Several employment-related cases are currently pending before the California Supreme Court, and their outcomes could have a significant impact on workplace policies and risk management for employers and HR professionals....more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

“Headless” PAGA Claim May Proceed

This case involves the (much-litigated) issue currently pending before the California Supreme Court in Leeper v. Shipt, Inc., 107 Cal. App. 5th 1001, rev. granted (2025): Does the version of PAGA in effect from 2016 to...more

Fisher Phillips

Looking Ahead to Leeper: California Supreme Court to Address “Headless” PAGA Claims

Fisher Phillips on

Even with the statutory clarifications that came along with last year’s PAGA reforms, California courts continue to wrestle with one of the thorniest aspects of the law: whether plaintiffs can maintain particularly troubling...more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Another Crucial Win for Employers re: Untimely Arbitration Fee Payments

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP on

On the heels of the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Wilson v. TAP Worldwide, LLC has provided welcome clarity and significant breathing...more

Morgan Lewis

California Supreme Court Holds State Law Requiring Timely Payment of Arbitration Fees Not Preempted by FAA

Morgan Lewis on

In Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that Section 1281.98 of the California Arbitration Act (CAA) is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Section 12.81.98 provides that if a party...more

Vedder

California Supreme Court Grants Relief to Employers for Late Arbitration Fees

Vedder on

The California Supreme Court recently granted employers a modicum of relief from the harsh consequences of an employer’s failure to timely pay required arbitration fees within the 30-day deadline imposed by California Code of...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

Supreme Court Saves (But Guts) Anti-Arbitration Statute

Hohenshelt v. Golden State Foods Corp., 18 Cal. 5th 310 (2025) - In this closely watched case, the California Supreme Court held that California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1281.98 — a do-or-die statute requiring...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Leeper v. Shipt: Will California Hamper Arbitration in PAGA Employment Lawsuits?

Troutman Pepper Locke on

In Leeper v. Shipt, the California Supreme Court will revisit the ongoing question of whether, and to what extent, employees can pursue litigation in court for violation of the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA),...more

K&L Gates LLP

California Employers Granted Slight Reprieve From Onerous Arbitration Fee Payment Requirements

K&L Gates LLP on

On 11 August 2025, California employers scored some relief from a rigidly applied arbitration statute with the California Supreme Court’s highly anticipated decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (Hohenshelt)....more

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

Late Payments in California Arbitrations No Longer an Automatic Breach

On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court and peeled away the draconian application of California's arbitration fee statute, California Civil Procedure Code §§...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

A Simple Payment Error is not a Waiver of the Right to Arbitrate

Fox Rothschild LLP on

I have some good news for California employers seeking to enforce arbitration agreements. The California Supreme Court just held that non-payment of arbitration fees does not automatically waive the right to arbitrate....more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

California Supreme Court Allows More Flexibility on Arbitration Fee Payment Rules

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

The California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressed whether California’s Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98, which requires the party that drafted the arbitration agreement to pay...more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Employers May Now Obtain Equitable Relief for Untimely Arbitration Payments

After years of appellate cases and several rulings holding California employers to the very strict payment standards of the California Arbitration Act (CAA), the California Supreme Court has, for the first time, addressed...more

DLA Piper

California Supreme Court Upholds California Law Imposing Mass Arbitration Fee Payment Deadline

DLA Piper on

The California Supreme Court recently issued a significant decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, holding that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt California laws requiring businesses to pay consumer or...more

Husch Blackwell LLP

California Supreme Court Tackles Federal Preemption Issues in Employment and Consumer Arbitrations

Husch Blackwell LLP on

On August 11, 2025, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in the matter of Dana Hohenshelt v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles, ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not preempt the California...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

California Supreme Court Rules FAA Does Not Preempt Arbitration Fee Deadline, Rejects Strict Penalties

On August 11, 2025, the Supreme Court of California ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a state statute requiring employers to timely pay arbitration fees or forfeit the right to arbitration. The...more

Clark Hill PLC

California employers gain relief in arbitration fee deadline ruling

Clark Hill PLC on

In a highly anticipated decision, the California Supreme Court in Dana Hohenshelt v. Golden State Foods Corp. relieves some pressure for employers, holding that late payment of arbitration fees does not result in an automatic...more

Fenwick & West LLP

CA Supreme Court: Federal Arbitration Act Does Not Preempt State Law on Timely Arbitration Fee Payment

Fenwick & West LLP on

The California Supreme Court recently held in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a California law that penalizes businesses that have consumer and employee arbitration...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

CA Supreme Court Offers Relief to Employers For Unintentional Arbitration Fee Delays

CDF Labor Law LLP on

Background: The Thirty-Day Arbitration Fee Rule - In 2019, the California legislature amended the California Arbitration Act (CAA) to require the party who drafts an arbitration agreement to pay all required arbitration...more

176 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 8

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide