Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Dispute Resolution and Arbitration
The Rise And Spread Of Mandatory Arbitration As A Substitute For The Jury Trial, Jean R. Sternlight
The Rise And Spread Of Mandatory Arbitration As A Substitute For The Jury Trial, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
THE CIVIL JURY trial is fast disappearing from our legal landscape, and one important reason for its disappearance is the rapid growth of mandatory arbitration. Yet, the imposition of mandatory arbitration eliminates the civil jury, and often this elimination is not made through a knowing, voluntary, or intelligent waiver. As I have argued elsewhere in greater detail, unless federal courts are generally willing to abandon the Seventh Amendment "knowing/voluntary/intelligent" civil jury trial waiver standard, they need to significantly revise their approach to mandatory arbitration clauses. If a given state allows the civil jury trial right to be waived through a …
Should An Arbitration Provision Trump The Class Action? No: Permitting Companies To Skirt Class Actions Through Mandatory Arbitration Would Be Dangerous And Unwise, Jean R. Sternlight
Should An Arbitration Provision Trump The Class Action? No: Permitting Companies To Skirt Class Actions Through Mandatory Arbitration Would Be Dangerous And Unwise, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
Companies are deliberately using mandatory arbitration to prevent consumers and employces from joining together in class actions. As Carroll Neesemann has explained, eliminating the class action is a "strong incentive" of those companies that impose the requirement of arbitration on consumers and employees. Mr. Neesemann defends this phenomenon, and his article offers companies and their attorneys some tips on how to effectively use arbitration to insulate themselves from the threat of class actions. By contrast, this essay argues that it is dangerous and unwise to permit companies to use mandatory arbitration to exempt themselves from class action suits.
Protecting Franchisees From Abusive Arbitration Clauses, Jean R. Sternlight
Protecting Franchisees From Abusive Arbitration Clauses, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
This article sets out a number of legal arguments that franchisees can potentially use to defeat arbitration clauses that seek to accomplish ends that would not be permissible in litigation. Drawing from decisions protecting consumers and employees from unfair arbitration clauses, as well as from opinions in the franchise context, this article analyzes arguments that can be based on the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, state statutes, and common law. By way of this analysis, it suggests that some courts are misapplying arbitration precedents and preemption arguments to support decisions that allow franchisors to effectively exempt themselves from legislation and even …
Gateway Widens Doorway To Imposing Unfair Binding Arbitration On Consumers, Jean R. Sternlight
Gateway Widens Doorway To Imposing Unfair Binding Arbitration On Consumers, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
Hill v. Gateway, is but the most extreme example of a series of court decisions that allow large companies to impose potentially unfair binding arbitration agreements on unwitting consumers. The outcome in Gateway, however, is questionable on federal statutory, common law, and constitutional grounds.