In a decision likely to have significant ramifications for employers, a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that employers cannot require employees to individually arbitrate their claims by way of “separate proceedings.” In Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP, No. 13-16599, D.C. No. 5:12-cv-04964 (9th Cir. August 22, 2016), … Continue Reading
In a 4-3 decision, the California Supreme Court recently determined that the question of “who decides whether [an arbitration] agreement permits or prohibits classwide arbitration” is not subject to a “universal rule [that] allocates this decision in all cases to either arbitrators or the courts.” See Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive, Inc., Case No. S220812, 2016 … Continue Reading
A California appellate court has ruled that where an arbitration agreement compels arbitration of employment claims but is silent on whether class actions are authorized, the trial court wrongly compelled the employer to participate in a wage and hour class arbitration. … Continue Reading
Does an employee have the right to proceed before the California Labor Commission after signing an agreement to arbitrate all claims? That is a question the California Supreme Court will have to decide after the U.S. Supreme Court vacated its decision in Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno and remanded the case for further consideration in light of AT&T Mobility v. … Continue Reading
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court again tackled the thorny issue of arbitration in light of the Federal Arbitration Act and struck down a California rule that effectively invalidated arbitration agreements that prevented class actions.
… Continue Reading