Arbitration
Nation goes into more depth on the decision and the issue of
separability/delegation as a whole.
A blog about Arbitration law, by Stephen Ware, a law professor at KU, in Lawrence, Kansas.
Search This Blog
Showing posts with label missouri. Show all posts
Showing posts with label missouri. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 23, 2019
Delegation Clauses in Arbitration Agreements
Sunday, March 17, 2019
Missouri Supreme Court Enforces Arbitration Agreement in At-Will Employment
An at-will employee argued that his promise to arbitrate was
not supported by consideration. Soars v. Easter
Seals Midwest, 563 S.W.3d 111 (Mo. 2018). While both lower courts agreed
with the employee and thus refused to compel arbitration, the Missouri Supreme
Court reversed because the agreement “includes a delegation clause, identical
to the one upheld in Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson, 561 U.S. 63 (2010),
providing:
The Arbitrator, and not any
federal, state, or local court or agency, shall have
exclusive authority to resolve any
dispute relating to the interpretation,
applicability, enforceability or
formation of this Agreement including, but
not limited to any claim that all
or any part of this Agreement is void or
voidable.”
“For [employee] to properly contest the validity of [this]
delegation provision, he must have challenged the delegation provision
specifically,” according to the Missouri Supreme Court. “The delegation
provision is supported by adequate consideration because the provision, severed
from the rest of the Agreement and considered by itself, is a bilateral
contract supported by consideration.” So the court held that it was for the
arbitrator to consider the employee’s other arguments.
In contrast, two dissenters “believe the arbitration
agreement in this case is not enforceable because it lacked legal consideration
due to Soars’ at-will employment status.”
Lisa Larkin of Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice LLC covers
the case with more details.
Labels:
delegation clause,
employment at will,
missouri
Location:
Lawrence, KS 66049, USA
Monday, November 19, 2018
Missouri Supreme Court Holds Unavailability of National Arbitration Forum Prevents Enforcement of Arbitration Agreement
The Missouri Supreme Court in A-1 Premium Acceptance, Inc. vs. Meeka
Hunter affirmed a
decision denying arbitration when a chosen arbitration forum was unavailable.
The parties’ agreement, contained in a lender’s contract of adhesion,
stipulated that the National Arbitration Forum (“NAF”) would resolve any
disputes. However, the NAF reached an agreement with the Minnesota Attorney
General and agreed not to arbitrate consumer disputes, including the one at
issue here. The Missouri Supreme Court held that nothing in the Federal Arbitration
Act created an obligation of the court to appoint a substitute arbitration
forum or arbitrator.
However, the Missouri Supreme Court
recognizes several disparate results in footnote four. In Green v. U.S. Cash Advance Ill., LLC, the 7th
Circuit uses § 5 of the FAA to appoint a substitute arbitration
forum reasoning that, “[the contract] makes one thing clear: These parties
selected private dispute resolution. Courts should not use uncertainty in just
how that would be accomplished to defeat the evident choice.” Green v. U.S.
Cash Advance Ill., LLC, 724 F.3d 787, 793 (7th Cir. 2013).
Maurice Wutscher LLP provides a
more detailed discussion
of the procedural history and reasoning.
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Workplace Arbitration
Workplace arbitration is the subject of a new website ArbitrationInfo.com by the Center for the
Study of Dispute Resolution at the University of Missouri School of Law and the National Academy of Arbitrators
Labels:
employment arbitration,
labor arbitration,
missouri,
NAA
Location:
Lawrence, KS 66045, USA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)