We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.


Refine your search

Content type


Firm name


333 results found


K&L Gates | USA | 25 Mar 2019

New Jersey's Latest METOO Law Goes Beyond Sexual Harassment

New Jersey recently joined a growing number of states limiting the use of non-disclosure agreements when settling claims of sexual harassment - and


DLA Piper | USA | 13 Feb 2019

Nondisclosure provisions and mandatory arbitration under fire in New Jersey

With nearly unanimous support in both chambers, the New Jersey legislature has passed Senate Bill 121, signaling the Garden State's intent to step


Baker & Hostetler LLP | USA | 8 Dec 2017

New Bill Would Outlaw Mandatory Arbitration Agreements For Sex Discrimination Disputes - Is A Poorly Constructed Bill The Right Cure For The Disease?

Prior bills have attempted, unsuccessfully, to eliminate individual arbitration as a means to resolve employment disputes. Senator Al Franken


Foley & Lardner LLP | USA | 29 Jul 2016

Wisconsin Court of Appeals Issues Reminder of Power of Federal Arbitration Act

In the last generation, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly promoted the policy under federal law in favor of arbitrating claims, including in the


Foley Hoag LLP | USA | 15 Mar 2011

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court holds that arbitration clause does not preclude MCAD proceeding

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently held that an employee could file a complaint with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination ("MCAD"), despite that she was subject to a valid arbitration agreement that expressly covered claims of employment discrimination.


Locke Lord LLP | USA | 20 Sep 2010

New York state court decision raises issues concerning the drafting of arbitration clauses

By Design, LLC terminated the employment of Oded Nachmani, who claimed he was wrongfully dismissed in violation of his employment contract and certain discrimination laws.


Holland & Knight LLP | USA | 6 Jul 2010

U.S. Supreme Court upholds authority of arbitrator to rule on the validity of agreements to arbitrate

A divided U.S. Supreme Court decided on June 21, 2010 that when an arbitration agreement includes a provision that delegates to the arbitrator authority to determine whether the arbitration agreement itself is enforceable, it is the arbitrator and not a court that must decide the validity of that agreement as a whole.


Locke Lord LLP | USA | 4 Dec 2009

Arbitrability of statutory discrimination claims

Congress enacted the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. 1 et seq. (the “FAA”) in 1925 as a solution to the “costliness and delays of litigation,” but arbitration has other benefits as well, including keeping potentially embarrassing discrimination claims private.


Seyfarth Shaw LLP | USA | 22 Sep 2009

Employees must arbitrate discrimination claims only if arbitration agreement states clear intention

In Warfield v. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Inc., the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) held that an employment contract purporting to waive or limit an employee’s rights under the Massachusetts anti-discrimination statute is enforceable only if the intent to do so is stated in “clear and unmistakable terms.”


Foley Hoag LLP | USA | 28 Jul 2009

Supreme Judicial Court holds that doctor is not required to arbitrate discrimination claims

Yesterday, the Supreme Judicial Court held in Warfield v. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, that a broad arbitration clause in an employment agreement did not apply to discrimination claims under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 151B.

Previous page 1 2 3 ...