Law Firm Failed to Provide Sufficient Notice of its Arbitration Agreement
This post has been viewed 3,410 times.
In Alexander Dubose Jefferson & Townsend, LLP v. Vance, the United States District Court (Western District, Austin) held that a law firm did “fairly suggest to employees that the firm was implementing a mandatory, binding arbitration policy” and denied the firm’s motion to compel arbitration.
According to the decision, ADJT terminated Vance’s employement with the firm. The firm sued Vance on causes of action including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act, and the Texas Theft Liability Ace. Vance, a non-equity partner, counterclaimed for conversion, breach of contract, negligence, and violations of Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. ADJT moved to compel all claims to arbitration. Vance responded that there was no valid arbitration agreement.
The court found that ADJT emailed its employees, under the subject line “Firm Policies” that it was “organizing, updating, and supplementing the firm’s employeee and practice policies,” including a dispute resolution program. The email gave directions on how to electronically access the updated Employee Handbook. The email did not include any “substantive information regarding the Dispute Resolution Program” nor did it use the word “arbitration.”
Read original articleTags:
