Arbitration Archives | Donahoo & Associates

Hot Topic – Arbitration

One of the hot topics on the legal landscape is Arbitration. Arbitration is a specific method of settling disputes that is outside of the court system. It relies on an unbiased third party to resolve disputes away from the courts. That means the decision maker is neither a currently sitting judge nor a jury, but ... Read More

FacebooktwitterlinkedinmailFacebooktwitterlinkedinmail

US Supreme Court Declines to Hear Iskanian Case

The United States Supreme Court has declined to hear an important California case that protects workers’ rights to pursue Labor Code penalties in a representative action.   The case, Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles LLC, involved a dispute between limo driver Arshavir Iskanian and employer CLS Transportation Los Angeles LLC (“CLS”).  Iskanian signed an arbitration ... Read More

FacebooktwitterlinkedinmailFacebooktwitterlinkedinmail

California Supreme Court Rules in Iskanian: Class Action Waivers In Employment Arbitration Agreements Are Valid

The California Supreme Court issued its long awaited ruling today in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation holding its prior ruling in Gentry v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 443 (Gentry) has been abrogated by recent United States Supreme Court precedent and that class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements are valid and a state‘s refusal to ... Read More

FacebooktwitterlinkedinmailFacebooktwitterlinkedinmail

Careful what you wish for…the risk of decertification

Employment cases routinely proceed as class actions. Plaintiffs and their attorneys seek to represent large numbers of employees to correct common legal wrongs and to obtain common fund damages. Employers and their counsel reflexively contest class certification or seek to decertify class action cases after certification is granted. But decertification has its risks. If a ... Read More

FacebooktwitterlinkedinmailFacebooktwitterlinkedinmail

Federal Court in Washington Rules 24 Hour Fitness Petitions Insufficient

A federal district court in the state of Washington has ruled that 24 Hour Fitness' petitions to compel arbitration failed to properly plead jurisdiction and therefore are insufficient and must be amended. The court, on its own motion, reviewed the petitions filed in the Western District of Washington and found that 24 Hour had not properly pleaded jurisdiction. After the court heard from 24 Hour Fitness in response to an Order to Show Cause, the court found the response was inadequate and ordered the petitions to be amended. The case is 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. v. Gorden, C11-2039RSM (W.D. Wash. 2012). A copy of the ruling is available here __________.

FacebooktwitterlinkedinmailFacebooktwitterlinkedinmail