Monthly Archives: January 2021

Jonathan Ingrisano and David Konkel of Godfrey & Kahn have this article in The National Law Review, discussing the pros and cons of including a mandatory arbitration provision in a trust agreement.

Lowell Ritter and Lucky Meinz of Sheppard, Mullin have authored this article, available in The National Law Review, discussing the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Garcia v. Haralambos Beverage Co. As they explain, the court “embraced the adage ‘time kills all deals’ to conclude that an employer waived its right to arbitrate the wage-hourContinue reading ““Delaying Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements May Lead to Undesirable Consequences””

Lexology has published this article from Buckley LLP, discussing a Pennsylvania District Court’s recent decision compelling arbitration of a consumer’s claim that a cable company violated FCRA by reviewing his credit reports without a permissible purpose. Although the consumer did not sign the agreement containing the arbitration provision, the court held he was equitably estoppedContinue reading ““Court orders arbitration on non-signatory claims””

Christopher Buch and Sean Power of Polsinelli have this article in JD Supra discussing the decision in Hensiek v.Board of Directors of Casino Queen Holding Company, Inc., No. 3:20-CV-377-DWD (7th Cir. January 25, 2021), denying a motion to compel arbitration for the reason that the amendment to the ESOP adding a mandatory and binding arbitration provisionContinue reading ““Illinois Court Strikes Down ESOP’s Arbitration Provision””

A federal court matter in the Western District of Pennsylvania is not off to a good start, with the plaintiff seeking an interlocutory appeal over the court’s order, following the initial Rule 16 conference, that the parties engage in an early neutral evaluation. In Pennsylvania Skill Games, LLC v. Action Skill Games, LLC, the plaintiff,Continue reading “Party Unsuccessfully Seeks Interlocutory Appeal Of Court ADR Order”

United States District Judge Dominic Lanza appeared to be frustrated or worse in directing the parties to arbitration in Quantum Fluids LLC v. Kleen Concepts LLC. As Judge Lanza describes the matter: “This case, which arises from a seemingly straightforward business dispute between Plaintiff Quantum Fluids LLC (“Quantum”) and Defendant Kleen Concepts LLC (“Kleen”), hasContinue reading “Federal Court, Raising A Judicial Eyebrow, Determines Case Is Arbitrable”

In Bufford v. VXI Global Solutions LLC an Arizona District Court, in compelling arbitration, rejected a claim that the agreement was substantively unconscionable in requiring a party to pay for transcription of arbitration proceedings. As the court explained, “Transcript costs are not significantly prohibitive. They are comparable to the costsassociated with transcribing the matter inContinue reading “Possibility Of Incurring Transcription Costs Does Not Render Arbitration Agreement Substantively Unconscionable”

Dave Reif offers this interesting take on the federal district court decision in ADT LLC v. Richmond, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8830 (N.D. Tex. Jan. 8, 2021) assessing whether there exists diversity jurisidiction to entertain an action to compel arbitration.

Sarah Meyer of Womble Bond Dickinson has this article in JD Supra, discussing the recent decision in Proctor v. First Premier Corp., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6502 (D.D.C. Jan. 13, 2021), denying a motion to compel arbitration “in a Fair Credit Reporting Act case, on the grounds that First Premier did not sufficiently establish thatContinue reading ““D.C. District Court Denies Motion To Compel Arbitration Of FCRA Claim Due to Insufficient Declaration””

Sarah Meyer of Womble Bond Dickinson has authored this article, available through The National Law Review, discussing the decision in Proctor v. First Premier Corp., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6502 (D.D.C. Jan. 13, 2021), denying a motion to compel arbitration “in a Fair Credit Reporting Act case, on the grounds that [the movant] did notContinue reading ““D.C. District Court Denies Motion To Compel Arbitration Of FCRA Claim Due To Insufficient Declaration””