Civil Litigation,
Labor/Employment,
Appellate Practice
May 23, 2019
Implied-in-fact arbitration agreements: when no doesn’t mean no
Two recent appellate decisions reach opposite conclusions in very similar situations. These decisions remind us that there rarely is such a thing as “the law.” Outcomes are dependent on the facts, the lawyering , and the judge.
Michael H. Leb
Neutral
Leb Dispute Resolutions
Labor & Employment
Phone: (310) 284-8224
Fax: (310) 284-8229
Email: michael@lebdr.com
U Michigan Law School
THE NEUTRAL CORNER is a monthly column discussing recent cases or topics of interest from a neutral's perspective.
THE NEUTRAL CORNER
In my last column, I defended the use of mandatory arbitration clauses in employment agreements while acknowledging the validity of some of the criticisms leveled by strong opponents of these clauses. Two recent cases, Diaz v. Sohnen Enterprises and $95
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