Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Washoe Cty. Sch. Dist. V. White, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 43 (June 29, 2017), Margarita Elias
Washoe Cty. Sch. Dist. V. White, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 43 (June 29, 2017), Margarita Elias
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Kara White (“White”) was terminated from her role as elementary school principal after the school district’s decision to terminate her was affirmed in an arbitration hearing. White filed a motion to vacate the award in district court. The district court granted White’s motion, holding that (1) the arbitrator exceeded his authority, (2) the arbitrator manifestly disregarded NRS 391.3116, and (3) the award was arbitrary and capricious. The school district appealed to the Supreme Court of Nevada, which reversed the district court’s ruling.
Principal Investments V. Harrison, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Jan. 14, 2016), Katherine Maher
Principal Investments V. Harrison, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Jan. 14, 2016), Katherine Maher
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held unless the arbitration agreement commits the question to the arbitrator with “clear and unmistakable” language, a litigation-conduct waiver is presumptively for the court to decide because it is a waiver based on active litigation in court. Thus, the district court judge in this case did not err in addressing whether the moving party waived its right to arbitrate, instead of referring the question to the arbitrator.
Mika V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Sep. 24, 2015), Kory Koerperich
Mika V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Sep. 24, 2015), Kory Koerperich
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The court denied extraordinary writ relief from the district court’s decision to compel arbitration between Petitioners and their employer based on a long-form arbitration agreement signed only by the Petitioners, and federal law favoring arbitration agreements.
Tallman V. Eight Judicial District Court, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 60673 (Sep. 24, 2015), Marta Kurshumova
Tallman V. Eight Judicial District Court, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 60673 (Sep. 24, 2015), Marta Kurshumova
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that an employment arbitration agreement, which contains a clause waiving the right to initiate or participate in class actions, constitutes a valid contract, even though it is not signed by the employer. The Court further determined that the Federal Arbitration Act applies to all transactions involving commerce and does not conflict with the National Labor Relations Act, which permits and requires arbitration. Finally, the Court found that a party does not automatically waive its contractual rights to arbitration by removing an action to federal court.