Law Commons^™

Customizing Employment Arbitration, Erin O'Hara O'Connor, Kenneth J. Martin, Randall S. Thomas

Scholarly Publications

According to the dispute resolution literature, one advantage of arbitration over litigation is that arbitration enables the parties to customize their dispute-resolution procedures. For example, parties can choose the qualifications of the arbitrator(s), the governing procedural rules, the limitation period, recoverable damages, rules for discovery and the presentation of evidence and witnesses, and the specificity of required arbitrator findings. While some scholars have questioned whether parties to arbitration agreements frequently take advantage of this customization, there is little solid empirical information about the topic.

In this Article, we study the arbitration clauses found in a random sample of 910 Chief …

Eliminating The Mandatory Trade-Off: Should Employees Have The Right To Choose Arbitration ?, Michael Peabody

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

As more employers include mandatory arbitration provisions in their employment contracts, policy-makers are becoming concerned that employees are being forced to trade their civil and statutory rights for their jobs. The California Legislature is considering legislation designed to combat this tendency and to provide legal protection for employees who might otherwise be forced to waive the right for redress of grievances, legal protections against discrimination, and other rights. Although the legislation was designed to protect the constitutional rights of employees, there are legal considerations and policy concerns that challenge the viability of this type of legislation. The primary question is …

Judicial Policing Of Consumer Arbitration , Edward A. Dauer

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Adhesive consumer arbitration agreements pose questions that go beyond the problems of adhesion contracting generally. This essay describes why standard-form consumer arbitration requirements may be particularly troublesome. Despite its superficial neutrality, arbitration between individual consumers and business entities may be systematically more favorable to the business entities. The rules of arbitration law, however, inhibit effective judicial policing of the consequences of those inequalities. The federal sources of arbitration law further diminish the ability of state-based contract law to police the more subtle abuses. The result is a particularly difficult jurisprudential problem with a specially weakened legal solution. This essay offers, …

Medical Malpractice Arbitration In The New Millennium: Much Ado About Nothing ?, Ann H. Nevers

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This paper reviews the constitutional issues surrounding medical malpractice arbitration clauses and the implementation of arbitration contracts, and the existing medical malpractice process. Federal preemption issues under the Federal Arbitration Act, enterprise liability and ERISA preemption, and cybermalpractice will be discussed. Finally, dispute resolution industry standards implemented by the American Arbitration Association and American Health Lawyers Association will be reviewed as well as current medical malpractice mediation practices in industry. While the past has shown that arbitration has not been used a great deal future trends may increase use. Emerging medical malpractice arbitration issues arising in the new millennium include …

First Options Of Chicago, Inc. V. Kaplan And The Kompetenz-Kompetenz Principle , Adrianna Dulic

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

In 1995, the United States Supreme Court in First Options of Chicago, Incorporated v. Kaplan considered whether arbitral tribunals or courts should have the primary power to decide if parties agreed to arbitrate the merits of the dispute and whether the court of appeals should accept the district court's findings of fact and law or apply a de novo standard of review. The Court unanimously held that, unless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise, the question of whether the parties agreed to arbitrate is to be decided by the court, not the arbitral tribunal. Furthermore, in such a case, …

Charge Me, Pay Me, But Don't Even Think Of Litigating Me: The Dominance Of Arbitration In Truth-In-Lending Claims , M. Susan Hale

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article analyzes the impact of the courts' ever increasing priority to enforce arbitration agreements in Truth In Lending Act (TILA) claims and reform. Part I entails a general discussion of TILA's logistics; the goals, the means, and the remedies. Part II briefly traces the rise of arbitration as well as evaluating its various advantages and disadvantages. Part III reports on the current emphasis of enforcing arbitration agreements in federal courts by explaining the basis of enforcing the agreement. Part IV explores the impact of arbitrating TILA claims on the claim and on individuals. Part V provides an analysis of …

Access To Consumer Remedies In The Squeaky Wheel System, Amy J. Schmitz

Faculty Publications

This article explores the “Squeaky Wheel System” (“SWS”) in business-to-consumer (“B2C”) contexts, referring to merchants’ reservation of purchase remedies and other contract benefits for only the relatively few “squeaky wheel” consumers who have the requisite information and resources to persistently seek assistance. The article uncovers how this system fosters contractual discrimination and hinders consumers’ awareness and access with respect to contract remedies. It also adds empirical insights from my recent e-survey, and offers suggestions for using the internet to empower consumers of all economic and status levels with efficient and accessible means for learning about their purchase rights and asserting …

Building Bridges To Consumer Remedies In International Econflicts, Amy J. Schmitz

Faculty Publications

Consumer purchases over the Internet (“ePurchases”) are on the rise, thereby causing an increase in conflicts regarding these purchases (“eConflicts”). Furthermore, these conflicts are increasingly international as consumers purchase goods over the Internet not knowing or caring where the seller is physically located. The problem is that if the purchase goes awry, consumers are often left without recourse due to the futility of pursing international litigation and the textured law and policy regarding enforcement of private dispute resolution procedures, namely arbitration. The United States strictly enforces arbitration contracts in business-to-consumer (“B2C”) relationships, while other countries have refused or limited enforcement …