State Laws on Screening and Federal Preemption – Where Are We Now and Where Are We Heading? — FCRA Focus Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday: Preparing for Biden's Vaccine Mandate, Mandate Pushback Begins, NLRA's Reach Expected to Expand - Employment Law This Week®
Williams Mullen Manufacturing Edge Video Series - Episode 1
Revisiting McGirt: New Legal Developments Challenge Oklahoma’s Landmark Ruling
Edible Bites Episode 8: Impact of Cannabis Legalization on Government Contractors
The Immediate and Lasting Impacts of McGirt: A Novel Ruling for Oklahoma
Podcast: Federal and State Cannabis Rules Are Moving in Different Directions - Diagnosing Health Care
Part 1 of 2: The Impact of Marijuana for Employers
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a district court’s refusal to enjoin arbitration was immediately appealable because the arbitration agreement was governed by state law rather than the Federal...more
The Ninth Circuit gave California employers a belated Valentine’s Day present by upholding the District Court’s injunction against enforcement of California Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”) because it inhibited arbitration contrary...more
Case Overview - On June 15, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, No. 20-1573. The Court held that the rule from Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles,...more
On June 15, 2022, in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, Case No. 20-1573,_ U.S. _ (2022), by an 8-1 majority, the U.S. States Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempts the California Supreme...more
The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana will dramatically impact employers’ rights to enforce arbitration agreements related to claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act...more
Wednesday, the United States Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana. The decision addresses the apparent conflict between the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and California’s...more
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, Case No. 20-1573, regarding California’s ban on Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) representative waivers...more
On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, which considered whether or not claims brought under the California Private Attorneys General Act...more
We all know that federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. What does that mean in the arbitration context? Something new as of March 31st! Federal courts do not have stand-alone jurisdiction to hear any...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The NJ Supreme Court issues its combined opinion in two cases that we previously blogged about (Colon v. Strategic Delivery Solutions, LLC and Arafa v. Health Express Corporation)...more
While much of the world came to a halt in response to the coronavirus pandemic, the California Courts of Appeal were busy issuing important decisions on the enforceability of arbitration clauses. As the economy starts to...more
If your business operates in California, you need to be aware of AB 51, a law that will take effect January 1, 2020. AB 51 precludes employers from requiring any applicant or employee, as a condition of employment, continued...more
California’s AB 51, barring mandatory arbitration agreements in employment, is now facing preemption and injunction challenges. On December 6, 2019, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, California Chamber of Commerce, and several...more
Add the Fifth Circuit to the growing list of Federal Circuit Courts that have decided that “class arbitrability” is a gateway question for a court, rather than an arbitrator, to decide in the first instance, absent the...more
A Pennsylvania federal district court granted a motion to compel arbitration pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act, over objection by the defendant on severability grounds. The defendant argued that its...more
As we reported on June 21, New York blew the lid off 30 years of sexual harassment and discrimination law by passing legislation that, among other things, bars mandatory arbitration of all claims of discrimination. That...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: A new decision in the Southern District of New York held that the N.Y. prohibition of mandatory, pre-dispute arbitration of sexual harassment claims is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act....more
An agreement to arbitrate sexual harassment claims is enforceable pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), federal Judge Denise Cote has ruled, rejecting arguments that New York law voids such an agreement. Latif v....more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued two 5-4 decisions in as many months regarding class procedures. Lamp Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 587 U. S. ____ (2019) was favorable to corporate defendants by limiting the availability of class...more
On April 24, 2019, in a 5-4 decision split along ideological lines, the Supreme Court held in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela that class arbitration is not available where arbitration agreements are unclear about whether the...more
Last year, the United States Supreme Court ruled that class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements are enforceable. But, the ruling did not address an agreement that is silent or ambiguous regarding the intent to...more
On April 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 5–4 opinion in Lamps Plus, Inc., et al. v. Varela holding that class arbitration is only allowed when the parties’ agreement explicitly allows for it. In other words, when...more
In a case with important implications for employers, Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, the United States Supreme Court held that class-wide arbitration may not be compelled pursuant to an arbitration agreement that is ambiguous as...more
On April 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an ambiguous arbitration agreement does not provide a sufficient basis to conclude that parties agreed to class arbitration....more
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varella, No. 17-988, 2019 WL 1780275 (U.S. Apr. 24, 2019), a lot of ink has been spilled on the issue of class arbitration. The Lamps Plus majority,...more