U.S. Supreme Court
Jan. 7, 2016
Arbitration back at high court next month
The case will turn on whether California courts hold arbitration agreements to different standards that other contracts when deciding whether to void the agreement or enforce it without the unlawful terms. By Jeffrey D. Polsky
Jeffrey D. Polsky
Partner
Fox Rothschild LLP
Labor & Employment
345 California St Ste 2200
San Francisco , CA 94104-2731
Phone: (415) 364-5540
Fax: (415) 391-4436
Email: jpolsky@foxrothschild.com
UC Hastings
Jeffrey cochairs the firm's Labor and Employment Department
In a groundbreaking decision issued in 2000, the California Supreme Court in Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, 24 Cal. 4th 83, articulated minimum requirements for most employment arbitration agreements. These included some fairly novel concepts such as requiring that the agreement contain "a modicum of bilaterality" and requiring that a court void the agreement (as opposed to striking offending ter...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In