LAMPS PLUS, INC. v. VARELA, 587 U.S. ___ (2019)

Issues: Arbitration Clause, Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Federal Arbitration Act

139 S.Ct. 1407 (2019) 587 U.S. ___. LAMPS PLUS, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. Frank VARELA. Supreme Court of United States. No. 17-988. Argued October 29, 2018. Decided April 24, 2019. Syllabus In 2016, a hacker tricked an employee of petitioner Lamps Plus, Inc., into disclosing tax information of about 1,300 company employees. After a […]

Read More

NEW PRIME INC v. OLIVEIRA, 586 U.S. ___ (2019)

Issues: Arbitration Clause, Civil Procedure, Employment Law, Federal Arbitration Act

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary […]

Read More

HENRY SCHEIN, INC. v. ARCHER AND WHITE SALES, INC., 586 U.S. ___ (2019)

Issues: Arbitration Clause, Federal Arbitration Act

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary […]

Read More

KINDRED NURSING CENTERS, L.P. v. CLARK, 581 U.S. ___ (2017)

Issues: Federal Arbitration Act

  NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See […]

Read More

ATT MOBILITY LLC v. CONCEPCION, 09-893 (U.S. 4-27-2011)

Issues: Federal Arbitration Act, Preemption

131 S.Ct. 1740 563 U.S. 333 ATT MOBILITY LLC v. CONCEPCION ET UX. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. No. 09-893. Argued November 9, 2010. Decided April 27, 2011. Headnotes PRE-EMPTION — Federal Arbitration Act — California’s Discover Bank Rule. California’s Discover Bank rule — which permits certain class […]

Read More

DirecTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, 136 S.Ct. 463 (2015)

Issues: Federal Arbitration Act, Federal Preemption

DIRECTV, INC., PETITIONER v. AMY IMBURGIA, ET AL. No. 14-462 136 S.Ct. 463 (2015) 193 L. Ed. 2d 365 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2015 Argued October 6, 2015 December 14, 2015 (Slip Opinion) Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection […]

Read More

Vargas v. Delivery Outsourcing, LLC (USDC, N.D. Cal.)

Issues: Arbitration of Employee Claims, Employment Law, Federal Arbitration Act

Case No. 15-cv-03408-JST SALVADOR VARGAS, Plaintiff, v. DELIVERY OUTSOURCING, LLC, et al., Defendants. United States District Court, N.D. California. March 14, 2016. Plaintiff, represented by Un Kei Wu, Liberation Law Group, P.C. & Arlo Garcia Uriarte, Liberation Law Group, P.C.. Delivery Outsourcing, LLC, Defendant, represented by Maureen K. Bogue, Pacific Employment Law LLP & Noah […]

Read More

VIMAR SEGUROS Y REASEGUROS, S.A. v. M/V Sky Reefer, 515 U.S. 528 (1995)

Issues: Arbitration Clause, Civil Procedure, Federal Arbitration Act

515 U.S. 528 515 U.S. 528115 S.Ct. 2322132 L.Ed.2d 462 VIMAR SEGUROS Y REASEGUROS, S.A., Petitioner,v.M/V SKY REEFER, her Engines, etc., et al. No. 94-623. Supreme Court of the United States Argued March 20, 1995. Decided June 19, 1995. Syllabus * After a New York fruit distributor’s produce was damaged in transit from Morocco to […]

Read More

Green Tree Fin. Corp. v. Randolph, 531 U.S. 79 (2000)

Issues: Civil Procedure, Federal Arbitration Act

531 U.S. 79;?121 S.Ct. 513;?148 L.Ed.2d 373 GREEN TREE FINANCIAL CORP.-ALABAMA et al. v. LARKETTA RANDOLPH No. 99 1235. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Argued October 3, 2000 Decided December 11, 2000 [qtbl style=”color=gray;”] Holding:?The Court unanimously upheld the Court of Appeals’ jurisdiction to hear the case, saying that the order compelling Randolph into […]

Read More