Legal Opinion
William Bayma v. Smith Barney, Harris Upham and Company, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 14, 1986No. 85-1506PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GOODWIN, Circuit Judge:
Smith Barney, Harris Upham and Co., Inc. brings this interlocutory appeal from an order denying a stay pending the compulsory arbitration called for in a contract of employment between Bayma, an account executive, and Smith Barney, a member firm of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).
At the time of Bayma’s employment, he executed a form contract drafted by the NYSE for use by its member firms. The agreement included a standard arbitration clause pursuant to Rule 347 of the NYSE. The arbitration clause on its face applies to any controversy between employee and employer…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Southland Corp. v. KeatingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Hope v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Tonetti v. ShirleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Parr v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
3Cited by32 opinions
- Circuit City Stores, Inc. A Virginia Corporation v. Saint Clair Adams, a California ResidentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- James L. Ticknor Janet Ticknor Larry Ticknor Tickco Holding, L.L.C. Ticknor Lodging Corporation v. Choice Hotels International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Stirlen v. Supercuts, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- Brown v. KFC National Management Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1996
- Jack B. Cohen, Betty L. Cohen v. Wedbush, Noble, Cooke, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.