Peleg v. Neiman Marcus Group, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MALLANO, P. J.
—Under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16), “arbitration is a matter of contract.” (Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Co. (1960) 363 U.S. 574, 582 [4 L.Ed.2d 1409, 80 S.Ct. 1347]; accord, 9 U.S.C. § 2.) An arbitration contract typically consists of the parties’ mutual promises to arbitrate their claims against each other.
In this employment case, an employer and its at-will employees purportedly entered into a contract requiring the arbitration of claims by both sides. But the contract contains a modification provision stating that the employer may amend,…
2Cases cited84 opinions
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Hertz Corp. v. FriendSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Oto, L. L.C. v. KhoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
- Serafin v. Balco Properties Ltd., LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- In re Facebook Biometric Information Privacy LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2016
- Pinela v. Neiman Marcus Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Aanderud v. Superior Court of Kern Cnty., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.