Tag Archives: Arbitration for Employment Law Disputes

One Defendant Compels Arbitration, Others “Wait and See”

When a plaintiff sues a company or agency and its officials, and only the company or agency compels arbitration, does the arbitration-losing plaintiff get a “second bite at the apple” in the lawsuit, against the officials? Or do the officials get a low-risk chance to get out of the lawsuit without ever getting to the merits? And what happens if plaintiff wins the arbitration? Read the blog post for the answers. Continue reading

Posted in Collateral Estoppel for Employment Law, Employment Law Newsletters, Lawsuits for Employment Matters, Washington DC Arbitration | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What is the Proper Role for Dispositive Motions in Arbitration?

To achieve speedy resolutions, and to resolve matters as cost-effectively as possible, arbitrators should be careful in allowing the filing of dispositive motions. They make sense for gateway issues, but not for issues going to the substance of the merits. Allowing such motions generally would lengthen the time required to resolve cases, and multiply discovery to the magnitude needed in Federal courts. When trials are held on affidavits, the parties need a lot of depositions because that may be their only opportunity to examine the other sides’ witnesses. Ruling out trials by affidavits in the bulk of cases allows the promise of arbitration–faster, cheaper and fair resolutions–to be realized. Parties need to know at the outset what will and will not be allowed, so they that can cut their discovery needs. Continue reading

Posted in ABA, ADR for DC Employment Law Cases, Baseless Cases for Washington DC Employment Law, Employment Law Newsletters, Federal Rules for Employment Law, Meritorious Cases for Employment Law, Summary Judgment in Employment Law Cases, Washington DC Arbitration | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment