Jenny Craig Arbitration Agreement Voided for Failure to Designate Forum, Process
“The process is important because the rights associated with arbitration forums differ depending on which is chosen, or how the arbitral process is defined,” Judge Douglas Fasciale wrote. “Here, the agreement ignored the subject altogether.”
October 18, 2018 at 11:21 AM
4 minute read
In a precedent-setting opinion in New Jersey, a state appeals court has invalidated an arbitration agreement between a former Jenny Craig employee and the company, ruling that the failure to designate an arbitration forum or process meant that their supposed contract lacked a “meeting of the minds.”
Wednesday's Appellate Division decision means that Marilyn Flanzman, a former longtime Jenny Craig employee, is allowed to press her age-discrimination and harassment lawsuit against the company in court.
Failing “to identify in the arbitration agreement the general process for selecting an arbitration mechanism or setting … deprived the parties from knowing what rights replaced their right to judicial adjudication,” the court said.
The panel, however, noted that “we do not impose any special language that parties must use in an arbitration agreement,” which “would violate Kindred Nursing [v. Clark], Atalese [v. U.S. Legal Services Group], and the other cases that preclude subjecting arbitration agreements to more burdensome requirements than other contractual agreements.”
Flanzman contends in her suit against Jenny Craig that as she aged, the company gradually—and discriminatorily—reduced her full-time hours at a Paramus location to just three hours per week. Then it allegedly fired her when she was 82, after she'd been employed as a Jenny Craig weight-loss counselor for 26 years, according to the unanimous Appellate Division panel opinion, Flanzman v. Jenny Craig, on Wednesday.
Flanzman and her attorneys had cited multiple grounds, arguing to the panel that Flanzman should not be forced into arbitration with Jenny Craig. The company had brought a motion to compel arbitration in the lawsuit.
The panel agreed with Flanzman's argument that the arbitration agreement the weight-loss counselor had signed in 2011—after some 20 years as a Jenny Craig employee—lacked mutual assent and was therefore invalid as a matter of contract law.
“In general, a forum is the mechanism—or setting—that parties use to arbitrate their dispute,” wrote Appellate Division Judge Douglas Fasciale on behalf of the three-judge panel, adding that the parties “could have designated an arbitral institution (like the American Arbitration Association (AAA) or the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS)), or they could have communicated a general method for selecting a different arbitration setting.
“The process is important because the rights associated with arbitration forums differ depending on which is chosen, or how the arbitral process is defined,” Fasciale continued. “Here, the agreement ignored the subject altogether.”
He further wrote, “We hold that the parties lacked a 'meeting of the minds' because they did not understand the rights under the arbitration agreement that ostensibly foreclosed plaintiff's right to a jury trial.”
Fasciale added: “We do not mean to imply that there must be 'magic words' in the agreement as to the rights that replace the right to judicial adjudication. Imposing such a requirement would upset the 'equal footing' that arbitration contracts enjoy with all other contracts.”
Flanzman's attorney said in a phone interview Wednesday that he and his client were “very gratified by the decision.”
David Zatuchni of Zatuchni & Associates in Lambertville added that, to his knowledge, the particular arbitration agreement issue before the panel—that leaving out an an arbitration forum and process from an agreement can invalidate it—was one of first impression in New Jersey, and therefore the appeals panel's ruling sets some precedent.
“From our standpoint, the decision makes clear that New Jersey courts are going to review these types of agreements, where employees purportedly waived their statutory right [to a trial], very carefully,” Zatuchni said, “and look to see that there is a true meeting of the minds and waiver.”
An attorney for Jenny Craig, Sharon Margello of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart in Morristown, could not be reached on Wednesday.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLiberty State Park Construction Site Fall Nets $2 Million for Injured Worker
3 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Bressler; Margolis Edelstein; Sills Cummis; Red Mass
7 minute readDOJ: TD Bank Agrees to Pay $3B Over Anti-Money Laundering Program Violations
2 minute readClass Action Lawsuit Targets 40 Private Colleges and Universities Over Alleged Price-Fixing
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250