Last week, a group of former Ponzi scheme financial advisers asked the United States Supreme Court to overturn the Fifth Circuit’s decision affirming a lower court’s order denying their motion to compel arbitration.
Continue reading...In October, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the consolidated cases of National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, No. 16-307 (5th Cir., October 26, 2015), Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-285 (7th Cir., May 26, 2016), and Ernst & Young LLP v. Morris, No. 16-300 (9th Cir., August 22, 2016).
Continue reading...Pat K. Chew, Judge J. Quint Salmon & Anne Salmon Chaired Professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, has published an interesting article titled “Comparing the Effects of Judges’ Gender and Arbitrators’ Gender in Sex Discrimination Cases and Why It Matters,” Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, Vol. 32, p. 195, 2017; University of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-21.
Continue reading...In a 2-1 decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has overturned a National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) ruling stating an employer may not require job applicants to sign a class-action waiver that is not included in an arbitration agreement because such a requirement violates the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).
Continue reading...S.I. Strong, Manley O. Hudson Professor of Law at the University of Missouri School of Law, has published “Anti-Suit Injunctions in Judicial and Arbitral Procedures in the United States,” 66 American Journal of Comparative Law __ (Forthcoming); University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-25.
Continue reading...by Holly Hayes U.S. Politics Today reported that in Connecticut, “as of July 1, the presiding judge over a medical malpractice case must refer the case to a 120-day mediation period or other alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process ‘before the close of proceedings.’” The stated purpose of the new statute which mandates mediation in medical malpractice cases is to achieve a “prompt settlement or resolution of the civil action.” The hope is that cases with very clear liability issues or those that are not meritorious to begin with can be settled before incurring the expenses of a trial. While there are some critics of the new law, it appears there is consensus that it will not resolve “big-ticket” malpractice cases. The new law may help avoid protracted litigation during the resolution of smaller cases, however. In August, we reported on an American Medical Association (AMA) survey of 5,825 physicians about medical liability lawsuits that said: The majority of lawsuits never made it to the courtroom, according to 2008 data from the Physician Insurers Assn. of America (PIAA), a trade group representing liability insurance companies owned or operated by physicians, hospitals and other health care professionals. Sixty-five percent were dropped, dismissed or withdrawn. About one in four claims was settled, and 4.5% were decided by alternative dispute mechanism. Of the 5% that went to trial, defendants won in 90% of cases, the PIAA said. But fighting a claim is costly. Defense against a claim averaged $22,163 for suits dropped, dismissed or withdrawn, and more than $100,000 for cases that went to trial, according to PIAA data. Let us hear from you about mandating mediation in medical liability cases. Holly Hayes is a mediator at Karl Bayer, Dispute Resolution Expert where she focuses on mediation of health care disputes. Holly holds a B.A. from Southern Methodist University and a Masters in Health Administration from Duke University. She can be reached at holly@karlbayer.com. Technorati Tags: Mediation
Continue reading...Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.
To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.
Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.
To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.