A Florida appellate court held that plaintiff was required to arbitrate her claims against the attorney and her law firm (defendants) that represented her in underlying divorce proceedings pursuant to an arbitration provision in the retainer agreement, despite other provisions being unenforceable. The court agreed with plaintiff that the retainer agreement’s fee-shifting and cost-shifting provisions were unenforceable for violating public policy. However, plaintiff was still required to arbitrate her alleged claims because the agreement to arbitrate was severable.
Read the complete story here.
In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Professor Kristen Blankley, who teaches Alternative Dispute Resolution, Advocacy in Mediation, Mediation, Family Mediation, and Arbitration at the Nebraska College of...
By Kristen Blankley, Amy SchmitzThis article was first published in the Arbitration Matters Blog, here. “Out here, due process is a bullet”, said John Wayne’s Col. Kirby in The Green Berets. Due process. Procedural fairness....
By Myriam SeersThis article was first published on the Securities Arbitration Alert blog. here. The Supreme Court on October 31 denied Certiorari in Caputo v. Wells Fargo, No. 22-265, a case involving a FINRA Award. We analyzed in...
By George Friedman
With the purchase of a Featured Membership, you will be shown on the front page of Arbitrate.com to web site visitors from your city and region (“state” if you are in the USA). You may appear in more than one city/region by purchasing additional locations.
