Federal Cases
Ninth Circuit to Address FAA Preemption of Discover Bank
Stern v. Cingular Wireless Corp., No. CV 05 8842 CAS, 2006 WL 2790243 (C.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2006)
9/11/2006
A federal district court in California granted a stay pending an interlocutory appeal of the Court’s order invalidating an arbitration agreement’s bar on class-wide proceedings. The stay would preserve the benefits of arbitration in the event of a Ninth Circuit decision holding that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California law singling out arbitration agreements that bar class-wide proceedings.
In Stern v. Cingular Wireless Corp., No. CV 05 8842 CAS, 2006 WL 2790243 (C.D. Cal. Sep. 11, 2006), Stern brought a class action against Cingular, her wireless phone service provider, alleging that she had been billed for unauthorized services... Full Story
Absent Exceptional Circumstances Federal Court will not Abstain From Hearing a Motion to Compel Arbitration in Automotive Case
Union Sec. Life Ins. Co. v. Starr, No. CIVA 206 CV 41 KS-MTP, 2006 WL 2727991 (S.D. Miss. 2006)
9/22/2006
The Federal District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi concluded that there were no exceptional circumstances present which warranted its abstention from hearing a motion to compel arbitration of a claim originally filed in state court.
In Union Sec. Life Ins. Co. v. Starr, No. CIVA 206 CV 41 KS-MTP, 2006 WL 2727991 (S.D. Miss. 2006), Starr, a mentally-disabled, elderly woman was listed as the primary purchaser in the sale of a 2001 Ford truck, although she thought she had been brought in as a co-signer. Also unbeknownst to Starr, credit disability and credit life insurance policies were issued to her by Union Security... Full Story
New York Federal Court Enforces Employment Arbitration Agreement; Concludes Modest Filing Fee will not have “Chilling Effect”
EEOC v. Rappaport, Hertz, Cherson & Rosenthal, P.C., No. CV 05-3928(ADS)(ARL), 2006 WL 2660981 (E.D. N.Y. Sept. 16, 2006)
9/16/2006
According to a New York federal court, a $125 arbitration filing fee in an employment dispute is not cost prohibitive because it would not create a “chilling effect” on similarly situated litigants.
In EEOC v. Rappaport, Hertz, Cherson & Rosenthal, P.C., No. CV 05-3928(ADS)(ARL), 2006 WL 2660981 (E.D. N.Y. Sept. 16, 2006), the EEOC and Melissa Castillo sued Castillo’s former employer, the law firm of Rappaport Hertz, for sex discrimination, retaliation, and constructive discharge... Full Story
Court Applies Older Wireless Arbitration Agreement...and Deems it Unconscionable
Stern v. Cingular Wireless Corp., No. CV 05-8842 CASCTX, 2006 WL 2789367 (C.D. Cal. July 28, 2006)
7/28/2006
In Stern v. Cingular Wireless Corp., No. CV 05-8842 CASCTX, 2006 WL 2789367 (C.D. Cal. July 28, 2006), a federal district court in California invalidated an older version of the parties’ arbitration agreement instead of considering a newer version that contained more reasonable terms.
Stern brought a class action against Cingular, his wireless phone service provider. When Stern originally obtained the phone service, she received a phone that came with a booklet containing an arbitration agreement that barred class-wide proceedings. Cingular later amended the service agreement to include a similar arbitration agreement with terms more favorable to the consumer. Specifically, the arbitration agreement in the amended service agreement required Cingular to pay the costs of arbitration and to pay attorney fees to a prevailing consumer... Full Story
Continued Employment Constitutes Consideration for Arbitration Agreement
Stern v. eSpeed, Inc., No. 06 Civ. 958(PKC), 2006 WL 2741635 (S.D. N.Y. Sept. 22, 2006)
9/22/2006
In Stern v. eSpeed, Inc., No. 06 Civ. 958(PKC), 2006 WL 2741635 (S.D. N.Y. Sept. 22, 2006), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York held that a female employee’s sexual harassment claims were arbitrable. The Court found evidence that she agreed to arbitration, and that in an employment context, continued employment provides sufficient consideration for the agreement.
Stern, a former employee of eSpeed, claimed that she did not recall whether she had signed an arbitration agreement. However, she did admit to the company’s human resources department that a copy of the company’s arbitration agreement contained something resembling her signature. Thus, the Court found that Stern had failed to unequivocally deny that she had seen and signed the documents. Since New York presumes that a signing party agreed to all the terms of the contract, the agreement was enforceable. See Maines Paper and Food Serv., Inc. v. Adel, 256 A.D.2d 760, 761 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)... Full Story
Under New York Law, Signature not Required for Arbitration Agreement Within Sales Contract
Maxit Designs, Inc. v. Coville, Inc., No. CIV. S-05-1040 WBS DAD, 2006 WL 2734366 (E.D. Cal. Sep. 25, 2006)
9/25/2006
Arbitration agreements contained within a series of unsigned sales contracts are enforceable where the nature of the ongoing business relationship indicates the intent to be bound by the terms of the unsigned agreements, according to a California federal court.
In Maxit Designs, Inc. v. Coville, Inc., No. CIV. S-05-1040 WBS DAD, 2006 WL 2734366 (E.D. Cal. Sep. 25, 2006), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California held that series of unsigned sales agreements containing arbitration terms were enforceable under New York law... Full Story
Georgia Federal Court Says Totality of the Circumstances Leads to Binding Arbitration Agreement
Dale v. Comcast Corp., No. 1:05-CV-3315-WCO, 2006 WL 2720624 (N.D. Ga. Sept. 18, 2006)
9/18/2006
A Georgia federal court granted a motion to compel arbitration, holding that the totality of the circumstances showed that a valid arbitration agreement existed that governed the parties’ dispute.
In Dale v. Comcast Corp., No. 1:05-CV-3315-WCO, 2006 WL 2720624 (N.D. Ga. Sept. 18, 2006), Dale, purporting to represent a class of subscribers to Comcast’s cable service, brought an action alleging that Comcast violated the Cable Communications Policy Act, 47 U.S.C. § 522 et seq... Full Story
Signatory’s Capacity to Consent to Arbitration in Nursing Home Dispute to be Decided by Court Prior to Compelling Arbitration
Washburn v. Beverly Enterprises-Georgia, Inc., No. CV 106-51, 2006 WL 2728627 (S.D. Ga. Aug 03, 2006)
8/3/2006
A federal magistrate in the Southern District of Georgia has recommended that, since the Supreme Court’s Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna decision declined to decide whether a party’s mental capacity to arbitrate should be decided by a court or an arbitrator, Eleventh Circuit precedent requires the issue to be decided by a court once the party makes a “colorable” showing of the lack of capacity to consent to arbitration.
In Washburn v. Beverly Enterprises-Georgia, Inc., No. CV 106-51, 2006 WL 2728627 (S.D. Ga. Aug 03, 2006), Sandra Washburn signed a “Resident and Facility Arbitration Agreement” prior to entering a Beverly nursing home... Full Story
Court Says Successor Company Not Bound by Arbitration Agreement
Joseph Huber Brewing Co., Inc. v. Pamado, Inc., No. 05 C 2783, 2006 WL 2583719 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 5, 2006)
9/5/2006
In denying a motion to compel arbitration, a federal district court in Illinois applied the rule against successor liability to an arbitration agreement entered into by a company that later sold its assets to another company.
In Joseph Huber Brewing Co., Inc. v. Pamado, Inc., No. 05 C 2783, 2006 WL 2583719 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 5, 2006), Huber and Central Distributing Company (CDC) entered into a distribution agreement that contained an arbitration clause. CDC later dissolved and sold some of its assets to Pamado. Following the sale of assets, Pamado acted as Huber’s distributor... Full Story
Debt Collection Dispute Falls Within Broad Arbitration Clause
Johnston v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, No. 06 C 0013, 2006 WL 2710663 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 15, 2006)
9/15/2006
In Johnston v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, No. 06 C 0013, 2006 WL 2710663 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 15, 2006), a federal district court in Illinois held that a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq., claim related to a debt collection agency’s alleged correspondence was covered by an arbitration clause between the consumer and her bank.
Johnston, along with several other Capital One Bank consumers, purportedly received an amendment to her cardholder agreement that added a broad arbitration clause. After Johnston defaulted under the terms of her agreement, Capital One deployed Arrow Financial Services (Arrow), a debt collection agency, to collect Johnston’s debt... Full Story
State Cases
Federal Arbitration Act Preempts State Arbitration Act When Parties Select the FAA to Govern Their Contract Disputes
Rodriguez v. American Technologies, Inc., 39 Cal. Rptr. 3d 437 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)
2/16/2006
When ruling on a motion to compel arbitration, courts must first look to the arbitration agreement to determine whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) or California state arbitration law applies, the California Court of Appeal has determined. If the parties expressly state that the FAA applies, then California law is preempted.
This California case holds that California state arbitration law must yield to federal arbitration law and that California state courts must apply federal law and not California law in reviewing and enforcing an arbitration case governed by the Federal Arbitration Act. This holding is consistent with the most recent state court case in Arkansas. See Pest Management, Inc. v. Langer, No. CA05-1387, 2006 WL 2741921 (Ark. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2006)... Full Story
Parties Agree to Application of Federal Arbitration Act, Preempting State Law and Its Limitation on Arbitration of Tort Claims
Pest Management, Inc. v. Langer, No. CA05-1387, 2006 WL 2741921 (Ark. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2006)
9/27/2006
The Arkansas Court of Appeals held that a tort claim was arbitrable because the parties chose the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to govern their arbitration agreement, thus preempting the Arkansas Uniform Arbitration Act (AUAA) and its limitation on predispute agreements to arbitrate tort claims. This holding is consistent with the most recent state court case in California.
In Pest Management, Inc. v. Langer, No. CA05-1387, 2006 WL 2741921 (Ark. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2006), Langer hired Pest Management to conduct a termite inspection of his home. The parties’ agreement required them to arbitrate disputes under the National Arbitration Forum Code of Procedure. The arbitration agreement provided that the transaction involved interstate commerce and, accordingly, that the FAA governed the agreement... Full Story
Arbitration of Fee Dispute and Res Judicata Bar Subsequent Malpractice Lawsuit by E Street Ex
Federici v. Gursey Schneider & Co., No. B183945, 2006 WL 2775212 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 28, 2006)
9/28/2006
Applying the doctrine of res judicata, a California Court of Appeal held that a client could not sue her accounting firm for malpractice because the retainer agreement required the client to raise any allegations of malpractice as a counterclaim at arbitration of the firm’s claims for unpaid fees.
In Federici v. Gursey Schneider & Co., No. B183945, 2006 WL 2775212 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 28, 2006), Kathlynn Federici (Federici) retained Gursey Schneider & Co. (Gursey) to provide accounting services in connection with Federici’s divorce from Danny Federici, longtime keyboardist for Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band... Full Story
California’s Mediation Confidentiality Rule Does Not Bar Evidence of Oral Settlement Agreement Reached at Mediation
Simmons v. Ghaderi, No. B180735, 2006 WL 2787408 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2006)
9/27/2006
A California Court of Appeal held that a mediation confidentiality provision in California’s Evidence Code did not bar evidence of an oral settlement agreement reached at mediation because application of the confidentiality provision would not have aided its purpose.
In Simmons v. Ghaderi, No. B180735, 2006 WL 2787408 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2006), Simmons sued Dr. Ghaderi for medical malpractice. In an attempt to settle the dispute, the parties attended a mediation session with a retired judge acting as mediator... Full Story
Claims Related to Embezzlement at Law Firm Arbitrable Even With Questionable Litigation Carve Out
Hoffman, Siegel, Seydel, Bienvenu & Centola, APLC v. Lee, 936 So.2d 853 (La. Ct. App. 2006)
7/12/2006
The Louisiana Court of Appeals upheld an arbitration clause between a law firm and its vendor for payroll support service and ordered the parties to arbitrate their dispute. The Court enforced the agreement even though it found troublesome a provision allowing the drafter to litigate claims for money past due.
In Hoffman, Siegel, Seydel, Bienvenu & Centola, APLC v. Lee, 936 So.2d 853 (La. Ct. App. 2006), Delbert Lee was the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) for the Hoffman Siegel law firm. As CFO, Lee contracted with Paychex, Inc., to provide payroll support services for the firm... Full Story
California Court Disclaims an Across-the-Board Rule Against Arbitration Agreements With Class Waiver Provisions
Merritt v. Cingular Wireless LLC, No. B178747, 2006 WL 2744357 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2006)
9/27/2006
In holding that a bar on class-wide proceedings rendered an arbitration agreement unconscionable and therefore unenforceable, a California Court of Appeal rejected the notion that California courts apply an across-the-board rule against arbitration agreements that bar class-wide proceedings.
In Merritt v. Cingular Wireless LLC, No. B178747, 2006 WL 2744357 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2006), Merritt brought a class action against Cingular, her wireless phone service provider, alleging that certain charges were falsely described as “taxes.” Cingular moved to compel arbitration pursuant to the service agreement, which contained an arbitration agreement barring class-wide proceedings. The trial court denied the motion... Full Story
Connecticut Supreme Court Sends Tobacco Settlement Dispute to Arbitration
Connecticut v. Philip Morris, Inc., No. 17548, 2006 WL 2505900 (Conn. Sept. 12, 2006)
9/12/2006
According to the Connecticut Supreme Court, the arbitration provision in a 1996 cigarette company settlement applies to an independent auditor’s decision whether or not to apply certain payment adjustments.
Connecticut v. Philip Morris, Inc., No. 17548, 2006 WL 2505900 (Conn. Sept. 12, 2006) decided one particular dispute between Connecticut and Commonwealth Brands, Inc., a tobacco company, as part of an ongoing and much larger battle between state governments and cigarette companies. In 1996, Connecticut brought an action against major tobacco companies for wrongful advertising and marketing of cigarettes. The case settled in 1998 by a written agreement applicable to any tobacco company willing to adhere to its terms... Full Story
Court Confirms Arbitral Award of Damages for Breach of Non-Compete Agreement Where Agreement Excluded Proceedings to Enforce the Agreement
Kelly v. Camillo, No. CV 054004458 S, 2006 WL 2773600 (Conn. Super. Sep. 13, 2006)
9/13/2006
The Supreme Court of Connecticut held that an arbitrator did not exceed his powers by awarding damages for breach of a non-compete agreement where the arbitration agreement excluded proceedings to enforce the non-compete agreement.
In Kelly v. Camillo, No. CV 054004458 S, 2006 WL 2773600 (Conn. Super. Sep. 13, 2006), Dr. Camillo, a dentist, entered into an employment contract with a dentistry corporation, Dorrance T. Kelly, D.D.S., P.C. (“Kelly”), which contained non-compete language and an arbitration agreement which excluded from its scope enforcement of the non-compete terms. After Kelly terminated Camillo’s employment, he continued practicing locally as a dentist in violation of the non-compete agreement. Kelly initiated arbitration seeking damages; Camillo did not appear, and an award was issued in Kelly’s favor... Full Story
Alaska Supreme Court Confirms Arbitrator’s Award Despite Evident Partiality Challenge; Endorses Reference of Future Disputes About the Award to Arbitrator
Kinn v. Alaska Sales and Service, Inc., No. S-11748, S-11768, 2006 WL 2789375 (Alaska Sept. 29, 2006)
9/29/2006
Considering the small size of the legal community in Anchorage, an arbitrator’s connections with attorneys representing arbitrating parties are unlikely to support a finding of evident partiality when there are no financial incentives for the arbitrator, the Supreme Court of Alaska held.
In Kinn v. Alaska Sales and Service, Inc., No. S-11748, S-11768, 2006 WL 2789375 (Alaska Sept. 29, 2006), Kinn and Alaska Sales arbitrated a dispute that arose after Alaska Sales purchased a car dealership and the attached land from Kinn. The arbitrator issued an award in favor of Alaska Sales and Kinn sought to have the award vacated, claiming that the arbitrator was evidently partial... Full Story
Parties who Agree to Arbitrate in California Submit to the Jurisdiction of California Courts
Fujitsu Software Corp. v. Hinman, No. A112781, 2006 WL 2789139 (Cal. App. Sept. 28, 2006)
9/28/2006
Agreeing to arbitrate in California manifests submission to the jurisdiction of California courts, a state court in California held.
In Fujitsu Software Corp. v. Hinman, No. A112781, 2006 WL 2789139 (Cal. App. Sept. 28, 2006), an arbitrator issued an award in Fujitsu’s favor when Hinman failed to deposit a source code for software into escrow, as required by the parties’ agreement. The award also ordered Hinman to provide support and maintenance services, as provided by the agreement... Full Story
Court Rejects Challenge to Arbitrator’s Reasoning
Morrissey v. Chequered Flag Int’l, B188032, 2006 WL 2748224 (Cal. App. 2 Dist. Sept. 27, 2006)
9/27/2006
In Morrissey v. Chequered Flag Int’l, B188032, 2006 WL 2748224 (Cal. App. 2 Dist. Sept. 27, 2006), a California Court of Appeal upheld an arbitration award over the losing party’s objections to the arbitrator’s damage calculations.
Morrissey purchased a vintage automobile from Chequered Flag International (CFI), but brought suit after discovering safety problems and that the vehicle’s engine size and features had been misrepresented to him. The parties agreed to arbitrate their claims and Morrissey prevailed, obtaining attorney’s fees nearly three times the value of the automobile itself... Full Story
California Court Strikes Down Bar on Class-Wide Proceedings
Winig v. Cingular Wireless LLC, No. C 06 4297 MMC, 2006 WL 2766007 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 27, 2006)
9/27/2006
In denying a motion to compel arbitration, a federal district court in California held that a bar on class-wide proceedings rendered an arbitration agreement unconscionable and therefore unenforceable.
In Winig v. Cingular Wireless LLC, No. C 06 4297 MMC, 2006 WL 2766007 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 27, 2006), Winig brought a class action against Cingular, his wireless phone service provider, alleging that Cingular improperly deducted “anytime minutes” for calls Winig made to check his voice mail... Full Story
California Court Upholds Oral Arbitration Agreement Made in Court
Giacomazza v. Coldwell Banker, No. B173551, 2006 WL 2743593 (Cal. App. Sept. 27, 2006)
9/27/2006
An oral agreement to arbitrate made in open court creates a contractual agreement to arbitrate that the parties are bound to, and ex parte communications between an arbitrating party’s attorney and the arbitrator do not necessarily show arbitrator bias, a state court in California held.
In Giacomazza v. Coldwell Banker, No. B173551, 2006 WL 2743593 (Cal. App. Sept. 27, 2006), Giacomazza brought an action against Coldwell Banker after Coldwell Banker cancelled an escrow on a contract to purchase a hotel. Coldwell Banker claimed that Giacomazza never deposited a check for $50,000 into the escrow... Full Story
Arbitration Award Must Contain Reasoning to be Vacated for Manifest Disregard of the Law, Georgia Court Holds
Progressive Plumbing, Inc. v. Abco Builders, Inc., No. A06A1328, 2006 WL 2742305 (Ga. App. Sept. 27, 2006)
9/27/2006
A court cannot vacate an arbitration award for manifest disregard of the law when the arbitrators did not give reasoning behind their award because, without reasoning, it is impossible to tell whether the arbitrators knew the applicable law and chose to ignore it, a Georgia state court held.
In Progressive Plumbing, Inc. v. Abco Builders, Inc., No. A06A1328, 2006 WL 2742305 (Ga. App. Sept. 27, 2006), Abco subcontracted with Progressive to perform some plumbing work on a construction project. The parties submitted a dispute to arbitration, and the arbitrator entered an award of damages in Progressive’s favor... Full Story
To Create a Valid Agreement to Arbitrate, Power of Attorney Should be Executed Before Signing Arbitration Agreement
Tallmadge v. Beverly Enterprises Missouri, Inc., No. ED 87981, 2006 WL 2728619 (Mo. Ct. App. Sept. 26, 2006)
9/26/2006
The Missouri Court of Appeals held that a power of attorney must be executed before the attorney-in-fact can sign an arbitration agreement on the principal’s behalf.
In Tallmadge v. Beverly Enterprises Missouri, Inc., No. ED 87981, 2006 WL 2728619 (Mo. Ct. App. Sept. 26, 2006), Carolyn Tallmadge was admitted to a care facility run by Beverly. As part of the admission process, Carolyn’s brother, James, signed an arbitration agreement on her behalf. A few months later, Beverly signed a durable power of attorney appointing James as her attorney-in-fact... Full Story
Parties Cannot Circumvent Arbitration Agreement by Adding Claims or Parties
Dodds v. Pulte Home Corp., Nos. 3262 EDA 2005, 3263 EDA 2005, 2006 WL 2788670 (Pa. Super. Ct. Sept. 28, 2006)
9/28/2006
In Dodds v. Pulte Home Corp., Nos. 3262 EDA 2005, 3263 EDA 2005, 2006 WL 2788670 (Pa. Super. Ct. Sept. 28, 2006), the Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that Dodds, a home buyer, could not avoid arbitration with Pulte merely by adding non-signatories or allegations of fraud to his lawsuit.
Dodds’ lawsuit arose from an alleged breach of a home construction contract that contained a broad arbitration clause providing for arbitration of “any controversy, claim or dispute.” Dodds claimed that he should not have to arbitrate because his fraudulent inducement claim was outside the scope of the arbitration clause. Also, Dodd asserted claims against Pulte’s parent corporation rather than the subsidiary entity that signed the arbitration agreement. Based on those circumstances, the trial court denied Pulte’s motion to compel arbitration... Full Story
ADR Legislation & Regulation
FEDERAL LEGISLATION
No new federal legislation.
STATE LEGISLATION
California AB 1598 (Introduced 2/22/2005) Adopted 9/27/2006
Subjects: Arbitration, Agriculture
Pursuant to provisions relating to the licensure and regulation of produce dealers, a procedure is provided whereby an aggrieved grower or licensee may file a complaint with the Department of Food and Agriculture subject to expedited review and settlement. If the dispute is not resolved through informal consultation, the complainant may pursue arbitration by following specified procedures, which include that the complainant pay a fee for the arbitration to the department made payable to the applicable arbitrator or arbitration service. Existing law also requires the respondent to pay a fee for any counterclaim that is filed. The Department is responsible for setting arbitration fees and for selecting arbitrators for its roster. Complete text of the bill.
California AB 2302 (Introduced 2/22/2006) Vetoed by Governor 9/30/2006
Subjects: ADR Interpreters
Existing law requires that in any action or proceeding pursuant to specified provisions of law, an interpreter be provided by the court for a party who is incapable of understanding or speaking the English language to interpret the proceedings in a language that the party understands and to assist communication between the party and his or her attorney. This bill would revise the above provision to specify that in any civil action or proceeding, including, but not limited to, any family court proceeding or service, any juvenile court proceeding, any action involving a traffic or other infraction, any small claims court proceeding, any proceeding to determine the mental competency of a person, or any court-ordered or court-provided alternative dispute resolution, including mediation and arbitration, in which a party does not proficiently speak or understand the English language, an interpreter be present to interpret the proceedings, as specified. The bill would also require a court to provide the interpreter, unless a party has notified the court that he or she has made arrangements for a private interpreter.
California AB 2624 (Introduced 02/24/2006) Adopted 09/28/2006
Subjects: Common Interest Developments, Arbitration
For common interest developments: Prior to initiating a foreclosure for delinquent assessments, an association shall offer the owner and, if so requested by the owner, shall participate in dispute resolution pursuant to the association's 'meet and confer' program required in Article 5 (commencing with Section 1363.810) of Chapter 4 or alternative dispute resolution with a neutral third party pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with Section 1369.510) of Chapter 7. The decision to pursue dispute resolution or a particular type of alternative dispute resolution shall be the choice of the owner, except that binding arbitration shall not be available if the association intends to initiate a judicial foreclosure. Complete text of the bill.
California AB 2871 (Introduced 02/24/2006) Adopted 09/28/06
Subjects: Student Records, Mediation
This bill authorizes parents requesting school records for their children to file a complaint if they do not receive the records within five days of the request. Complaint procedures specify that the complaining party may request mediation of the dispute at any time during the hearing process. Complete text of the bill.
REGULATIONS
Florida Reg 31418 (Proposed 09/29/2006)
Subject: Mediation
Amends rule to make the certification of mediator provisions applicable to cooperatives and to correctly refer to the appropriate section. CITATION: FAC 61B-25.001 though .004.
Oregon Reg 27957 (Proposed 10/01/2006)
Subjects: Arbitration, Interconnection Agreements
Eliminates the specific comment period and, if the filing is acceptable, has staff place the agreement on the consent agenda for approval at a Public Meeting. Clarifies the rights of parties in arbitration.
© 2006 National Arbitration Forum - www.adrforum.com - Unsubscribe
