Federal Cases
Federal Court in Florida Cites Opt-Out Provision in Upholding Class Waiver
Sanders v. Comcast Cable Holdings, LLC, No. 3:07-cv-918-J-33HTS, 2008 WL 150479 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 14, 2008)
1/14/2008 12:00:00 AM
Finding no evidence that cable television subscribers did not receive notice of the addition of an arbitration agreement to their cable contract, and finding no unconscionability in a class action waiver therein, a federal district court in Florida ordered the subscribers to individually arbitrate their claims against Comcast.
In Sanders v. Comcast Cable Holdings, LLC, No. 3:07-cv-918-J-33HTS, 2008 WL 150479 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 14, 2008), Sanders and other cable television subscribers filed a class action lawsuit against Comcast, alleging that certain cable television features did not work as advertised. The subscribers brought the suit for breach of contract and for violation of Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA)... Full Story
Court Holds that Unauthorized Practice of Law Claim is Arbitrable
Guiterrez v. State Line Nissan, Inc., No. 08-0285-CV-W-FJG, 2008 WL 3155896 (W.D. Mo. Aug. 4, 2008)
8/4/2008 12:00:00 AM
A Missouri federal district court determined that an unauthorized practice of law claim was arbitrable despite a consumer’s objections that Missouri courts were the sole authority empowered to determine whether conduct constitutes unauthorized practice of law.
In Guiterrez v. State Line Nissan, Inc., No. 08-0285-CV-W-FJG, 2008 WL 3155896 (W.D. Mo. Aug. 4, 2008), Guiterrez sued State Line Nissan (Nissan) for charging a document preparation fee in relation to the purchase of her vehicle. Guiterrez alleged the fee constituted the unauthorized practice of law. Guiterrez also sought to represent a class of individuals similarly situated... Full Story
Arbitrators Did Not Exceed Powers in Issuing Award Against Non-Signatory
Legacy Trading Co., Ltd. v. Hoffman, No. CIV-07-1383-M, 2008 WL 3876034 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 18, 2008)
8/18/2008 12:00:00 AM
A federal court in Oklahoma upheld an arbitral award and rejected a public policy challenge where there was no violation of clearly expressed law. The Court also rejected the claim that the arbitrators exceeded their power by issuing an award against a non-signatory.
In Legacy Trading Co., Ltd. v. Hoffman, No. CIV-07-1383-M, 2008 WL 3876034 (W.D. Okla. Aug. 18, 2008), Hoffman, a securities trader, filed an arbitration claim against Legacy Trading and Uselton (collectively, Legacy) for an alleged breach of his employment contract. An arbitrator found Legacy and Uselton jointly and severally liable to Hoffman. Legacy moved to vacate the award... Full Story
Generalized and Unsupported Allegations of Unfairness Insufficient to Buttress Unconscionability Challenge
Cronin v. Citifinancial Services, Inc., No. 08-1523, 2008 WL 2944869 (E.D. Pa. July 25, 2008)
7/25/2008 12:00:00 AM
A borrower’s various objections to an arbitration agreement, including that the neutrals were biased that arbitration would be cost-prohibitive, were rejected by a Pennsylvania federal court, which ultimately enforced the agreement.
In Cronin v. Citifinancial Services, Inc., No. 08-1523, 2008 WL 2944869 (E.D. Pa. July 25, 2008), Cronin took out a loan from Citifinancial. The loan documents included an agreement to arbitrate. When Citifinancial reported the loan to credit reporting agencies, it reported the full amount of the loan including five years worth of interest. Cronin contested the account balance with the credit reporting agencies... Full Story
Court Cites "Irreparable Harm" of Litigation Expenses in Staying I-Phone Class Action Pending Appeal of Arbitration Denial
Steiner v. Apple Computer, Inc., No. C 07-04486 SBA, 2008 WL 1925197 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 2008)
4/29/2008 12:00:00 AM
Acknowledging that litigation expenses resulting from the denial of a motion to compel arbitration can constitute "irreparable harm" to the moving party, a California federal district court has granted a motion to stay an I-Phone class action lawsuit pending appeal of an order denying arbitration.
In Steiner v. Apple Computer, Inc., No. C 07-04486 SBA, 2008 WL 1925197 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 2008), Steiner filed a class action lawsuit against Apple and AT&T for breach of contract and other claims stemming from the purchase of an Apple I-Phone. AT&T moved to compel individual arbitration of Steiner's claims in accordance with their agreement... Full Story
Fifth Circuit Rejects "Manifest Disregard" Challenge Based on Factual Findings, Does Not Reach Question of Its Continued Validity After Hall Street
Rogers v. KBR Technical Services, Inc., No. 08-20036, 2008 WL 2337184 (5th Cir. June 9, 2008)
6/9/2008 12:00:00 AM
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected an aggrieved party's challenge to an arbitration award based on "manifest disregard of the law," holding that, even if manifest disregard remains a valid ground for vacatur under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), it could not be found to apply to this particular award.
In Rogers v. KBR Technical Services, Inc., No. 08-20036, 2008 WL 2337184 (5th Cir. June 9, 2008), Rogers entered into an employment contract for work in Afghanistan with KBR. As part of the contract, Rogers agreed to submit all employment-related disputes to arbitration under the Halliburton Dispute Resolution Program (HDRP)... Full Story
Hallmark's Dispute Resolution Program Not Greeted Warmly by Missouri Appellate Court
Morrow v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., No. WD 67440, 2008 WL 2582662 (Mo. Ct. App. June 30, 2008)
6/30/2008 12:00:00 AM
A Missouri state appellate court has refused Hallmark's attempt to compel arbitration of a former at-will employee's discrimination claims, citing the arbitration agreement’s lack of mutuality and its illusory nature.
In Morrow v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., No. WD 67440, 2008 WL 2582662 (Mo. Ct. App. June 30, 2008), Morrow was an employee of Hallmark. During the course of Morrow's employment, Hallmark adopted a dispute resolution program (DRP) requiring arbitration of certain employment disputes if internal non-binding resolution was unsuccessful. Hallmark specified that continued employment after the effective date of the DRP would constitute acceptance of the program's terms. Hallmark also emphasized that the DRP did not change the character of its at-will relationship with its employees... Full Story
State Cases
California Court Holds Abbreviated Statute of Limitations Period Gave Employee Sufficient Time to Vindicate Statutory Rights in Arbitration
Pearson Dental Supplies, Inc. v. Superior Court, No. B206740, 2008 WL 3867617 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 21, 2008)
8/21/2008 12:00:00 AM
An appellate court in California held that where an employment arbitration agreement provides a one-year limitations period for bringing claims, an employee has sufficient time to vindicate his Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) rights even though the FEHA may provide a longer statute of limitations.
In Pearson Dental Supplies, Inc. v. Superior Court, No. B206740, 2008 WL 3867617 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 21, 2008), Turcios sued Pearson Dental Supplies (Pearson), his former employer, for age discrimination under the California FEHA... Full Story
Divided Texas Supreme Court Finds Party Waived Right to Arbitrate After Initial Vehement Opposition to Arbitration and Extensive Litigation Discovery
Perry Homes v. Cull, 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex. 2008)
5/2/2008 12:00:00 AM
A divided Texas Supreme Court held that a homeowner waived his right to arbitrate a dispute with a builder by initially resisting arbitration, conducting full discovery in supposed preparation for litigation, and ultimately seeking to compel arbitration shortly before trial.
In Perry Homes v. Cull, 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex. 2008), Cull sued builder Perry Homes and various warranty companies for defects to a home. The warranty companies immediately requested arbitration in accordance with an agreement with Cull, but Cull vigorously opposed arbitration. At the time, no party pressed for a ruling. Instead, Cull's attorney requested extensive discovery from all defendants, including Perry Homes... Full Story
Indiana Court of Appeals Holds That Arbitration Claimant Must Seek Court Order Compelling Arbitration If Party Objects to Arbitral Jurisdiction
MBNA America Bank, N.A. v. Kay, 888 N.E.2d 288 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)
6/12/2008 12:00:00 AM
In affirming a lower court order denying and dismissing a credit card company’s application to confirm an arbitration award, the Court held that once the credit card holder objected to arbitral jurisdiction, the credit card company was required to seek a court order compelling arbitration pursuant to section 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The Court’s holding in this case reduces to mere surplusage an Indiana statute that sets forth a procedure whereby the cardholder could have obtained a court order staying the arbitration.
In MBNA America Bank, N.A. v. Kay, 888 N.E.2d 288 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008), MBNA filed an arbitration claim with the National Arbitration Forum (FORUM), alleging that Kay had an unpaid balance on an MBNA credit card. In response, Kay filed a statement objecting to the arbitration and claiming that he never agreed to submit to the FORUM’s jurisdiction... Full Story
ADR Legislation & Regulation
LEGISLATION
None.
REGULATIONS
None.
© 2008 National Arbitration Forum -
www.adrforum.com - Unsubscribe
