As reported this week by the Workplace Prof Blog, a U.S. District Court in Colorado has issued a decision involving arbitration of statutory claims within the context of a collective bargaining agreement. The case is Mathews v. Denver Newspaper Agency, LLP, 2009 WL 1231776 (D. Colo. 2009). Professor Richard Bales’ analysis of the decision is here: First Post-Pyett Case. Previous Coverage: U.S. Supreme Court Enforces Agreement to Arbitrate Discrimination Claims (April 3, 2009) 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett: Conflicts of Interest (April 6, 2009) Related Posts: Pyett Analysis – Unions Can Waive But what is Clear and Unmistakable?, Sarah Cole, ADR Prof Blog, April 3, 2009. Supreme Court’s Decision in Pyett Collective Bargaining Case Will Have Little Real World Effect, George Lenard, JURIST- Hotline, April 5, 2009. Some Interesting Questions Raised by the Pyett Decision, Philip J. Loree Jr., Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum, April 7, 2009. Technorati Tags: arbitration, ADR, law, U.S. Supreme Court, ADE waiver, Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, National Labor Relations Act of 1935, 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett

[Ed. note: Obama nominated Sotomayor on May 26; see Hispanic National Bar Association Press Release] Ever since U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter revealed his plan to retire, speculation of possible President Barack Obama‘s picks to replace him has flooded the blogosphere. SCOTUSblog has been profiling the “shortlist” candidates with an analysis of their opinions that intersect the Supreme Court’s decisions. Here is an excerpt of today’s SCOTUSblog post on Judge Sonia Sotomayor‘s civil opinions. This one involves arbitration. Rolon v. Henneman, 517 F.3d 140 (2d Cir. 2008): As part of a settlement alleging that the acting police chief (among others) had violated an officer’s constitutional due process rights, the parties agreed to submit pending disciplinary charges to arbitration. Both the acting chief, Henneman, and another officer, Moskowitz, testified at the arbitration hearing. The arbitrator ruled largely in Rolon’s favor, concluding that neither Henneman nor Moscowitz had testified truthfully or credibly. Rolon then filed suit against the two, claiming that they had caused him anguish, abused their positions, and violated his right to due process. The district court agreed with Henneman that he was entitled to absolute immunity, and the Second Circuit – in an opinion by Judge Sotomayor – affirmed. In the panel’s view, the Supreme Court’s decision in Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983), providing absolute immunity to police officers who testify at judicial proceedings, applies equally to an arbitration proceeding such as this one, in which Henneman “performed substantially the same function as witnesses in judicial proceedings with nearly identical procedural safeguards.” Moreover, the panel agreed, Rolon had failed to state a claim against Moscowitz. The full post is here: Judge Sotomayor’s Civil Opinions – Part IV. Related Stories: Who Will Replace Souter? Today’s News: Obama Interviews Judge Diane Wood, ABA Journal, May 20, 2009 What’s in Souter’s Future? Civics, for Starters, Wall Street Journal, May 20, 2009. ATL Poll: Who Should Replace SCOTUS Justice David Souter?, Above the Law, May 1, 2009. Technorati Tags: ADR, law, arbitration, Sonia Sotomayor, Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court

We are happy to announce that Disputing has teamed up with the Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum to create the Commercial and Industry Arbitration and Mediation Group. The Commercial and Industry Arbitration and Mediation Group is a forum for the open discussion of issues and sharing of information concerning commercial and industry arbitration, mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution. We invite you to register here.