Law Commons^™

Time’S Up: Against Shortening Statutes Of Limitation By Employment Contract, Meredith R. Miller

Scholarly Works

Employers are increasingly adding clauses to contracts with employees that purport to shorten the statutes of limitation for employees to pursue claims against their employers (“SOL Clauses”). SOL Clauses are being imposed on employees in various stages of the contracting process. They have turned up in job applications, offer letters, arbitration clauses, employment agreements and employee handbooks. Where they have been enforced by the courts, the justification has been a prioritization of “freedom of contract” over any other policy concerns. This Article argues that, in the employment context, “freedom of contract” should not be prioritized over other competing concerns, which …

Boba Fett, Bounty Hunters, And The Supreme Court’S Viking River Decision: A New Hope, Imre S. Szalai

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

The United States Supreme Court recently issued a fractured decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (June 15, 2022), a classic David v. Goliath clash between a worker and employer. Can arbitration agreements be used to eliminate group or representative actions brought against employers, where the plaintiff worker is serving as a bounty hunter for the State? Although the majority clearly holds that a worker’s individual claims must be sent to arbitration pursuant to a predispute arbitration agreement, the splintered opinions leave some uncertainty regarding what happens to the representative claims of the other …

Dangerous Or Benign Legal Fictions, Cognitive Biases, And Consent In Contract Law, Chunlin Leonhard

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Building on existing scholarship on legal fictions and empirical psychological research about human decision making processes, this Article offers a systematic approach to distinguishing a dangerous legal fiction from a benign one.

This Article begins by summarizing scholarly discussions about legal fictions in general, courts’ typical uses of legal fiction, and more general concerns with legal fictions. Part II of the Article summarizes scientific findings about how humans think and what our common cognitive biases are. It then explains how findings regarding the human decision-making process may shed light on why certain legal fictions can be dangerous. This Section …

Conflict Of Laws In Arbitration Agreements Between Developed And Developing Countries, Mary Kathryn Lynch

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

"Expanded" Judicial Review Revisited: Kyocera Overturns Lapine, Eric Van Ginkel

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Just when you thought you could validly add a clause to your client's arbitration agreement providing that the losing party may take an appeal from the award to the district court having jurisdiction over the parties, think again. What was the law of the Ninth Circuit since December 1997, when a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decided LaPine Technology Corporation v. Kyocera Corporation ("LaPine I"), has just been reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc. In its decision, on a rehearing of what the court refers to as " …

The Third Party Non-Signatory's Ability To Compel International Commercial Arbitration: Doing Justice Without Destroying Consent , James M. Hosking

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article analyzes the legal theories and other mechanisms employed in international commercial arbitration to achieve a workable compromise among the above-cited propositions. In so doing it touches on larger, more complex questions like the position of third parties in contract law, the jurisdictional foundations of arbitration, and the role of choice-of-law issues in determining the validity of the arbitration agreement. However important these broader concerns may be, they should not undermine the importance of the issue in its own right.

Purpose, Precedent, And Politics: Why Concepcion Covers Less Than You Think, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

This article sketches some possible limitations on the impact AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion will have going forward. While many have seen the Supreme Court’s decision as simultaneously signaling an end to the viability of class action lawsuits and undermining principles of federalism, there may be reasons to believe that it will not have implications quite so far reaching. Specifically, this article proposes three reasons why Concepcion’s impact may be limited. First, the decision lends itself to a more narrow reading, which simply demands that courts take the entire of an arbitration agreement into account before deploying common law defenses to …

Ascertaining The Parties' Intentions In Arbitral Design, George A. Bermann

Faculty Scholarship

Supreme Court case law teaches us that the federal interest in arbitration does not consist of enforcing agreements to arbitrate according to some sort of abstract or ideal arbitral model, but rather according to the particular arbitral model upon which the parties had agreed. This body of law is driven by the same notions of party autonomy that underlie the law of arbitration generally. That parties may agree to forego access to national courts in favor of arbitration is an initial manifestation of that attitude. By logical extension, the parties also enjoy extraordinary latitude in determining the features that "their" …