Five Star et al. v. Mandviwala
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Lower Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Whether a California rule that prohibits the enforcement of arbitration agreements with respect to representative employment claims under California's Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA"), and that is applied to no other type of agreement, is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") because the rule discriminates against arbitration agreements.
- Whether a California rule that prohibits the enforcement of arbitration agreements with respect to representative employment claims under PAGA is preempted by the FAA because the rule eviscerates bilateral arbitration agreements and thereby thwarts the objectives of the FAA.
The Retail Litigation Center joined the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business associations in filing a amici brief asking the Court to accept the case to end California’s latest efforts to use its policy preferences to override the FAA and also explains the harms created by California courts’ refusal to enforce arbitration agreements.
The Court denied the petition.
Procedural History and Case Documents
- Petition for Certiorari, March 2108