The California Supreme Court has carved out a narrow exception to one of its seminal arbitration rulings, provoking a fair amount of sniping between the majority and the dissent. The 4-3 majority opinion pokes a small hole in a key 1992 ruling that said arbitrators' decisions, even if erroneous, can't be judicially reviewed unless there is evidence of corruption or fraud. A dissenting judge accused the majority of making an "unsupported and unprecedented move to judicialize the arbitration process."
April 28, 2010 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Narrow though it was, the California Supreme Court on Monday carved out an exception to one of its seminal arbitration rulings, provoking a fair amount of sniping between the majority and the dissent.
By a 4-3 vote, the court held that arbitration awards can be vacated if employees under mandatory arbitration agreements are deprived through legal error of hearings over unwaivable statutory rights, such as those provided by the state’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join General Counsel and Senior Legal Leaders at the Premier Forum Designed For and by General Counsel from Fortune 1000 Companies
This conference brings together the industry's most influential & knowledgeable real estate executives from the net lease sector.
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
Duane Morris LLP seeks a highly motivated junior associate to join its dynamic and growing Labor and Employment Class Action group in Chicag...
Duane Morris LLP seeks a full-time staff litigation attorney who has practiced between 3-5 years. Experience will include drafting motions, ...
Duane Morris LLP has an immediate opening for a senior level, highly motivated litigation associate to join its dynamic and growing Employme...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
