Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gove v. Career Systems Development Corp.

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided July 17, 2012No. 11-2468Published

1DissentTorruella, Circuit Judge

The panel majority acknowledges that Gove’s application for employment at CSD contained a valid agreement to arbitrate. Nonetheless, it concludes that Gove is not required to take her claims to arbitration because principles of Maine contract law— specifically, the Maine Law Court’s fealty to the tenet of contra proferentem5 for adhesion contracts — require us to interpret any ambiguity in the scope of the agreement against the drafter (here, CSD). This it reasons, despite the otherwise broad federal principle that doubts about an arbitration clause’s scope should be resolved in favor of…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Ohio v. RobinetteSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API