Following are two interesting and recent federal court rulings related to arbitration.
Future Disputes are beyond Arbitral Authority
Minnesota Nurses Association v. North Memorial Health Care
After completing 30 years of service, Nurse Lynette Drake asked to be relieved of the obligation to work weekends. When her supervisor required her to report under a “needed-nurses” exception, Drake filed a grievance.
The arbitrator concluded that the exception was properly invoked. However, in order...
Statutes of limitations provide peace of mind for many attorneys and clients, knowing previous conduct cannot lead to liability after a prescribed time period. But, do statutes of limitations apply to arbitration proceedings? The answer is: not necessarily. Because of that, advocates and parties need to know when statutes of limitation may apply as well as how they can revise their arbitration clauses to avoid this confusion.
The benefits of applying the statute of limitations to arbitration...
From this morning’s National Law Journal article (available here) reporting on the 9th circuit’s consideration of the appeal from a N.D.CA court’s finding that Uber’s arbitration clause was unenforceable for reasons of unconscionability:
According to Uber, Chen’s rulings refused to follow the Ninth Circuit’s 2013 en banc decision in Kilgore v. KeyBank, which held that an arbitration agreement cannot be deemed procedurally unconscionable if it provides meaningful opportunity to opt out.
Laura...
Gemalto, a leading international digital security company based in Amsterdam, reportedly won a $45 million arbitration award against Merchant Customer Exchange (MCE), a consortium of United States retailers that includes Wal-Mart, Target, and Kohl’s. Gemalto claimed that MCE, for its own convenience, terminated a contract to develop a mobile payment platform. The panel of three arbitrators awarded Gemalto contract damages plus more than $3 million in attorney’s fees.
MCE is seeking...
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in MHN Government Services v. Zaborowski to decide whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California’s arbitration-only severability rule, under which courts are given the discretion to invalidate an arbitration agreement with more than one unconscionable clause or to sever the unconscionable terms and enforce the remainder of the agreement. The answer to this question will have to wait for another day because the parties settled their dispute prior to the scheduled...
Sometimes the end of the arbitration is not the end of the dispute. A party prevailing in arbitration is not out of the woods, given that the underlying contract can still be challenged under traditional defenses to the formation of contract and a court, not an arbitrator, determines the enforceability of a contract under California law.
The case of Sheppard v. J-M Manufacturing Co., 2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 69 (Jan. 29, 2016), grapples with and clarifies the role of the courts in determining the fate...
Fiber customers have two months to opt out of binding arbitration clause.
Google Fiber's new terms add a clause familiar to subscribers of other large Internet service providers: customers who want to sue the company must now instead submit to arbitration.
The Google Fiber terms were updated last week with a note that they now "require the use of binding arbitration to resolve disputes rather than jury trials or class actions." While the clause allows cases in small claims court, it otherwise...