Tag Archives: Arbitration

Judge Furman: Arbitrator’s Criminal Conviction During Case Does Not Void Award (Steptoe Success)

In an opinion yesterday, Judge Furman upheld an arbitration award worth over $200 million in favor of a company affiliated with Israeli businessman Lev Leviev, and against his former partners in a series of diamond businesses.  The former business partners argued that the award should be set aside because one of the arbitrators was convicted of … Continue Reading

Judge Rakoff Stays Antitrust Action Against Uber Pending Appeal Over Arbitrability

As part of the ongoing Uber antitrust litigation, Judge Rakoff granted today the defendants’ request to stay the proceeding pending an interlocutory appeal of his prior order denying defendants’ motion to compel arbitration (see our coverage here). Judge Rakoff noted that the while the defendants had not made a “strong showing” that they would succeed on the … Continue Reading

Judge Rakoff Rules That Uber’s Customer Arbitration Clause Is Not Conspicuous Enough to Be Enforceable

In an opinion today, Judge Rakoff denied a motion to compel arbitration of antitrust claims against Uber’s CEO because he found that the arbitration clause was too concealed for the plaintiff to have reasonably agreed to it.  (See our prior posts on the case here.) When a user enters his or her credit card information, … Continue Reading

On Heels of Inquiry Into Potential Litigation Misconduct, Uber CEO Moves to Have Case Heard in Arbitration

Yesterday — just hours after Judge Rakoff ordered broad discovery from Uber and its in-house counsel regarding potentially improper investigative techniques —  Uber’s CEO moved to compel arbitration in the antitrust class action brought by Uber riders (see previous coverage here).  The motion argues that the CEO, as an employee of Uber, is entitled to assert Uber’s arbitration clause … Continue Reading

Second Circuit Sides With NFL in DeflateGate Appeal

In a decision today, the Second Circuit, by a 2-1 vote, reversed Judge Berman’s ruling in the DeflateGate case, effectively reinstating Tom Brady’s four-game suspension for his role in deflating footballs used during the 2015 AFC Championship Game. Tom Brady and the NFL Player’s Association focused their appeal on the fact that, based on the … Continue Reading

NFL DeflateGate Reply: Policy of “Fines” for Equipment Violations Is Not Applicable to Footballs and Doesn’t Foreclose Suspensions

The NFL filed its reply brief in the DeflateGate appeal yesterday.  As we previously reported, Tom Brady’s opposition brief focused on the fact that the NFL’s written policies for players state that first-time equipment violations will result in fines, which, he argued, would give no notice that a suspension was possible.  The NFL’s reply brief counters … Continue Reading

Tom Brady’s Deflategate Appeal Brief Focuses on Bargained-For Policy that First-Time Equipment Violations Would Result Only in Fines

Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and the NFL Player’s Association filed their appeal brief yesterday with the Second Circuit, responding to the initial brief filed by the NFL.  The brief from Brady and the Player’s Association argues that there was a bargained-for policy for first-time equipment violations to result only in fines, and that Judge Berman … Continue Reading

NFL to Second Circuit: Deflategate “Should Not Have Been A Close Case”

The NFL yesterday filed its opening brief in the “Deflategate” appeal.  The introduction claims that Judge Berman did not give Commissioner Goodell appropriate deference when he reversed Tom Brady’s four-game suspension: [T]his should not have been a close case. The Commissioner exercised the precise authority that the CBA grants him when considering allegations of conduct detrimental to … Continue Reading

SDNY Blog Returns as Steptoe Blog

The SDNY Blog is relaunching as a publication of Steptoe & Johnson LLP.  We expect to post several times a week on decisions and other developments in the Southern District of New York.  You can find us right here at www.sdnyblog.com, or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Here’s a quick summary of what’s been happening in the Southern … Continue Reading

Judge Hellerstein: Mexican Court Violated “Basic Fairness” in Attempting to Nullify $400 Million Arbitration Award Against State Oil Company

In an opinion today, Judge Hellerstein confirmed a nearly $400 million arbitration award in favor of “COMMISA,” an affiliate the Houston-based contracting firm KBR, against “PEP,” a subsidiary of Mexico’s state-owned oil company, notwithstanding that a court in Mexico, where the arbitration was held, ruled the dispute was not arbitrable and nullified the award:… Continue Reading
LexBlog