A plaintiff claiming Amazon.com Inc.’s voice-activated Alexa devices recorded her private conversations without authorization will have to arbitrate her “surreptitious recording” claim, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said in an unpublished ruling Friday.
In a fractured decision, the court held that insofar as the lower court decided the surreptitious recording claim wasn’t subject to arbitration because the allegation is “criminal in nature,” the district court was wrong.
Read the complete story, here.
For a detailed discussion of the decision, see here.
In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Prof. Imre Szalai of Loyola University New Orleans, a nationally-known scholar regarding the Federal Arbitration Act, and his teaching interests and...
By Imre Szalai, Amy SchmitzIn 2020 Congress passed the "No Surprises Act" [i] (The "Act") to address the sometimes-abusive practice of Out-of-Network medical billing. The Act created a federal arbitration program to adjudicate disputes...
By David BerryIn this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Jonathan Eades, Senior Legal Counsel, British Columbia Office of the Attorney General, on Canadian arbitration law. https://youtu.be/AvnY_aQi7cM
By Jonathan Eades, 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.