Earlier this month, an arbitration panel issued a $10 million award against former professional bicyclist Lance Armstrong and now-defunct team management company Tailwind Sports Corporation. The award resulted after an arbitral panel agreed to reopen 2005 arbitration proceedings between Armstrong and Dallas-based SCA Promotions over cycling-related bonuses.

The United States Supreme Court has refused to consider a California case holding the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) does not apply to a worker’s labor code enforcement claim that was brought under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). In CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC v. Iskanian, No. 14-341, a worker sought to file a class action lawsuit against his employer over a number of wage and hour claims.

Teresa Jacqueline Verges, Lecturer in Law and Director of the Investor Rights Clinic at the University of Miami School of Law has published, “Opening the Floodgates of Small Customer Claims in FINRA Arbitration: FINRA v. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.,” 15 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 623, 2014. In her article, Professor Verges examines the effect that recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions regarding the Federal Arbitration Act have had on the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

The Northern District of Texas in Dallas has dismissed a lawsuit challenging the selection of a panel of arbitrators. In AVIC Intern. USA, Inc. et al. v. Tang Energy Group, Ltd. et al., No. 3:14-CV-2815-K (February 5, 2015), AVIC and Thompson (“plaintiffs”) entered into a wind energy joint investment agreement with Tang and four others (“defendants”).