Samuel Estreicher

May 01, 2002 | New York Law Journal

D espite the Supreme Court`s several pronouncements, most recently in Circuit City v. Adams ( Circuit City I ), 1 concerning the strong federal policy favoring the arbitration of employment disputes a policy that applies regardless of whether they are obtained as a condition of employment or cover discrimination and other statutory causes of action as well as contractual claims the enforceability of such agreements continues to be contested in the Ninth Circuit with some success.

By Samuel Estreicher And Kenneth J. TurnbullFocusing On State Contract Law In The Aftermath Of `circuit City`

14 minute read

December 22, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In their Arbitration feature, Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett of Jones Day discuss the backgrounds and arguments of ongoing class arbitration cases and hypothesize on the Supreme Court's future decisions.

By Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett

11 minute read

March 17, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Samuel Estreicher, Dwight D. Opperman Professor at New York University School of Law and of counsel to Jones Day, and Steven C. Bennett, a partner at the firm, write that although the Supreme Court has somewhat retreated from the "manifest disregard" of law as grounds for vacatur of an arbitration award, many courts are apparently reluctant to accept its demise.

By Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett

16 minute read

September 06, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Samuel Estreicher, a professor at New York University School of Law and of counsel to Jones Day, and Steven C. Bennett, a partner at the firm, write that the decision to remand an arbitration for further proceedings requires analysis of such elements as the clarity and completeness of the initial award, as well as whether the arbitrators kept within their delegated authority and reached their decision without appearances of impropriety.

By Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett

13 minute read

July 21, 2006 | Law.com

State laws vary as to whether and by what means arbitrators can be given or denied the power to award punitive damages. In some states, arbitration clauses that proscribe punitive damage awards may be unenforceable. Attorneys Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett discuss potential state public policy limitations on the ability of parties to grant or deny power to arbitrators to award punitive damages in the arbitration of contract disputes, and suggest some drafting solutions to such limitations.

By Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett

12 minute read

May 01, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Samuel Estreicher, Dwight D. Opperman Professor at New York University School of Law and counsel to Jones Day, and Steven C. Bennett, a partner at the firm, write that the U.S. Supreme Court held that a federal court must "look through" a petition to compel arbitration under Section 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act2 to determine whether the court would have federal question jurisdiction over the underlying controversy. The Court also held, they say, that, for a federal court to have jurisdiction, the initial complaint, not any anticipation of a federal defense or a federal counterclaim, must establish a basis for federal jurisdiction.

By Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett

8 minute read

July 11, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Samuel Estreicher, a professor at New York University School of Law and of counsel to Jones Day, and Steven C. Bennett, a partner at Jones Day, discuss potential state public policy limitations on the ability of parties to grant or deny power to arbitrators to award punitive damages in the arbitration of contract disputes, and suggest some drafting solutions to such limitations.

By Samuel Estreicher and Steven C. Bennett

12 minute read

August 06, 2002 | New York Law Journal

A NEW YORK trial court recently, in Sawtelle v. Waddell & Reed, Index No. 115056/01, (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. June 10, 2002), confirmed an arbitration panel`s award of million in punitive damages against a financial services company, which was found to have wrongly interfered with a former employee`s efforts to attract clients to his new employer`s firm.

By Samuel Estreicher And Rene M. Johnson

13 minute read

November 24, 2003 | New Jersey Law Journal

While attempting to codify pre-existing practice formulated through years of common law developments and making significant changes to the arbitration process, a careful reading of New Jersey's Revised Uniform Arbitration Act, which was signed into law on June 23, reveals several key ambiguities which, more likely than not, will require interpretation by the courts.

By Rene M. Johnson and Samuel Estreicher

9 minute read

November 07, 2003 | Law.com

The 9th Circuit, sitting en banc, has finally joined the rest of the country in holding that there is no Title VII exception to the enforcement of employment arbitration agreements in EEOC v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps, LLP. However, the opinion leaves open at least one remaining area for employees to attack such agreements, through the doctrine of unconscionability and other generally applicable contract defenses.

By Samuel Estreicher and Rene M. Johnson

12 minute read