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.
Measuring the impact of the Covid-19 global pandemic in the International Arbitration field was not an easy task. However, it has been promptly targeted by Maria Fanou and Norah Gallagher...
By Cemre Kadioglu, Carolina Mauro, Wendy GonzalesThe Supreme Court has decided Morgan v. Sundance Inc., No. 21-328, ruling unanimously that there is no prejudice requirement under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) for a court to find a waiver of...
By George FriedmanIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Catherine A. Rogers, a scholar of international arbitration and professional ethics at Penn State Law, with a dual appointment as Professor...
By Catherine Rogers, Amy Schmitz
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.
