Nonparty Lawrence Satz received an arbitral subpoena in a proceeding between International Seaway Trading Corp. and Target Corp. Satz was a former owner of Seaway. The subpoena — the second issued to Satz during the proceeding — sought documents and virtual deposition testimony about certain issues he had refused to discuss at his first deposition. Before the second deposition, Satz moved to quash the subpoena on three grounds, each of which was rejected.
Read the complete story here.
This article first appeared on LexBlog.com, here. Seyfarth Synopsis: Though it may sound esoteric, the question of whether “last mile” drivers fall within the Federal Arbitration Act’s transportation worker exemption bears...By Lennon B. Haas, Kyle Petersen, Kevin M. Young
This article was first published on the Thomson Reuters Practical Law Arbitration Blog, here. This three-part blog provides a diversity checklist to help retain and promote young and diverse talent...By Hanna Roos
In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Erin Archerd, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. Erin joined the Detroit Mercy Law...By Erin Archerd, Amy Schmitz