Nationwide FLSA Lawsuits Just Got Harder—Here’s Why - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
The Labor Law Insider: How Arbitrations Help Preserve Labor-Management Peace, Part I
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: “Accidental Arbitration” -- A New Theory that Would Rein in Consumer Arbitration Clauses and the Scope of the FAA
#WorkforceWednesday®: PAGA in California, NLRB Authority, New Employment Laws in 2025 - Employment Law This Week®
Recent Developments in California's Arbitration Landscape — FCRA Focus Podcast
Dogecoin’s Day in Court
#WorkforceWednesday® - Key SCOTUS Decisions This Term for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 14: Resolving Cross-Border Conflicts Through International Arbitration
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Discussion of Industry and Consumer Perspectives on Mass Arbitration
Navigating Mass Arbitration: New Rules and Strategies — The Consumer Finance Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday: Avoiding Legal Illusions - Crafting Effective Arbitration Agreements - Employment Law This Week®
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Look at a New Approach to Consumer Contracts
Do You Need an Arbitration Clause in Your Energy Contract? Pros and Cons
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Reasons Why the CFPB Should Deny the Petition for Rulemaking on Post-Dispute Consumer Arbitration Agreements
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Deep Dive into Mass Arbitration, with Special Guest Andrew Pincus, Partner, Mayer Brown
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: US Supreme Court “Viking River” Decision Brings PAGA Relief for CA Employers
Employment Law Now VI-116-Top 10 Employment Issues To Consider For The Summer Kick-Off
3 Key Takeaways | Drafting & Navigating Dispute Resolution Clauses
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
On August 11, 2025, the Supreme Court of California ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt a state statute requiring employers to timely pay arbitration fees or forfeit the right to arbitration. The...more
Once again, the California legislature's attempt to kneecap arbitration agreements in the employment arena has been swept aside by a federal court. As of February 15, 2023, California employers may continue to require...more
Some good news for California employers. Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that California employers can require employees and applicants to sign arbitration agreements as a condition of...more
As of February 15, 2023, employers in California may once again require mandatory arbitration as the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), a...more
Mandatory Arbitration Agreements for Employees Are “On” Again...for Now. Once upon a time, before a certain virus captured all of our attention, the California legislature enacted Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), which prohibits...more
On Feb. 15, 2023, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s ruling that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), which made it a criminal offense for an...more
On February 15, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals blocked a 2020 California law that attempted to prohibit employers from requiring employees and job applicants to agree to arbitration as a condition of employment. The...more
A federal appeals court just paved the way for California employers to continue utilizing mandatory arbitration agreements with employees and job applicants. You may be familiar with the litigation roller coaster of...more
On May 25, 2022, the Essex County Superior Court in Sellino v. Galiher, et al., ESX-L-8519-21 (N.J. Super. Ct. May 25, 2022) denied the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in a sexual harassment case, determining that...more
In this episode, partners Chris Valente and Jackie Celender, along with associates Michael Creta and Peter Ayers, discuss the impact that state anti-arbitration insurance statutes have on the enforceability of international...more
Businesses and attorneys alike have kept a close eye on the developments surrounding the challenge to California Assembly Bill 51 (now codified as Labor Code section 432.6). Most recently, in a 2-1 decision, the 9th Circuit...more
The battle concerning California’s Assembly Bill (AB) No. 51 - the law seeking effectively to ban mandatory employment arbitration in California - continues to rage. On October 20, 2021, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the...more
- The Ninth Circuit rules that portions of Assembly Bill 51 are not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) and lifts a lower court’s injunction that barred the law from taking effect. - The court did rule that...more
The New Jersey Supreme Court issued a combined opinion in two cases arising from arbitration agreements in employment contracts. The plaintiffs in the respective cases claimed they fell within section 1 of the Federal...more
A New York State Trial Court judge recently ruled that an agreement between a company and an employee to arbitrate sexual harassment claims was unenforceable due to 2018 amendments to New York State’s Human Rights Law, which...more
- On July 13, 2020, the New York Supreme Court in Andowah Newton v. LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton Inc., Sup. Ct., N.Y. County, July 13, 2020, J. Nock, Index No. 154178/2019, slip op at p. 16, allowed the plaintiff employee...more
A controversial California law that would have prevented employers from requiring arbitration agreements as a condition of employment has been enjoined from taking effect by a federal district judge. Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51)...more
A federal district court found that the new California law barring mandatory employment arbitration agreements is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The court granted the challengers’ motion for preliminary...more
On February 7, 2020, United States District Court Judge Kimberly J. Mueller issued a decision explaining her prior order blocking enforcement of California's new law restricting arbitration agreements, AB 51. ...more
On January 31, 2020, Chief United States District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller enjoined California from enforcing AB 51. This new legislation prohibits employers from requiring their employees to sign arbitration agreements....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Among other things, AB 51 makes it unlawful for employers to impose arbitration agreements on employees as a condition of employment, even if employees are permitted to opt out. AB 51 was quickly challenged...more
On February 7, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued an order supporting its injunction of Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), an expansive anti-arbitration law enacted in October, which was...more
Not surprisingly, OTO, LLC, the employer in OTO, L.L.C. v. Kho, 8 Cal. 5th 111 (2019), on January 13, 2020, petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review a 2019 California Supreme Court decision not to enforce an arbitration...more
On January 31, 2020, Judge Kimberly Mueller issued a preliminary injunction "in full" preventing the State of California from enforcing AB 51, the state's new law effectively banning mandatory employee arbitration...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: After granting a temporary restraining order days before AB 51 was to go into effect, the Eastern District of California granted a motion for a preliminary injunction on January 31, 2020. An order detailing...more