Kanbar v. O'Melveny & Myers
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.
Plaintiff Paulina Kanbar has filed suit against Defendant O’Melveny & Myers (“OMM”), asserting claims for, inter alia, fraud, retaliation, sex discrimination, and failure to prevent discrimination. Ms. Kanbar brings- both class claims as well as individual claims. The class claims are predicated on OMM’s alleged failure to inform its. employees that, in Davis v. O’Melveny & Myers, 485 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir.2007), the Ninth Circuit deemed OMM’s arbitration agreement (known as the Dispute Resolution Program…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
- New York v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Discover Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Sparks v. Vista Del Mar Child & Family ServicesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Mance v. Mercedes-Benz USADistrict Court, N.D. California · 2012
- Jasso v. Money Mart Express, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2012
- Lucas v. Hertz Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2012
- Figueroa v. Thi of New MexicoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2012
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.