§
RIM HOSPITALITY

15 Cited authorities

  1. Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. Animalfeeds Intr.

    559 U.S. 662 (2010)   Cited 1,715 times   211 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a prudential ripeness argument was waived

  2. EPIC Sys. Corp. v. Lewis

    138 S. Ct. 1612 (2018)   Cited 967 times   169 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under Concepcion , "courts may not allow a contract defense to reshape traditional individualized arbitration" and "a rule seeking to declare individualized arbitration proceedings off limits" is preempted by the FAA

  3. Zimomra v. Alamo Rent-A-Car

    522 U.S. 948 (1997)   Cited 104 times
    Holding that active supervision unnecessary where challenged ordinance left defendants, car rental companies at Denver International Airport, virtually no discretionary authority in setting and collecting usage fees from their customers because usage fee determined by detailed formula

  4. Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP

    834 F.3d 975 (9th Cir. 2016)   Cited 147 times   52 Legal Analyses
    Holding arbitration provisions mandating individual arbitration of employment-related claims violate the NLRA and fall within the FAA's saving clause

  5. D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013)   Cited 141 times   145 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an arbitration agreement that prohibited an employee from pursuing claims collectively did not violate the NLRA and must be enforced

  6. Lewis v. Epic Sys. Corp.

    823 F.3d 1147 (7th Cir. 2016)   Cited 124 times   58 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such waivers violate the Fair Labor Standards Act

  7. Murphy Oil United States, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    808 F.3d 1013 (5th Cir. 2015)   Cited 66 times   103 Legal Analyses
    Upholding its earlier holding in D.R. Horton, Inc. v. NLRB , 737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013), that arbitration provisions mandating individual arbitration of employment-related claims do not violate the NLRA and are enforceable under the FAA

  8. O'Neill v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    509 U.S. 904 (1993)   Cited 18 times
    Declining to apply the rule where "all the relevant facts were known. It was the meaning of the law that was misunderstood."

  9. U.S. ex Rel. Fine v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc.

    72 F.3d 740 (9th Cir. 1995)   Cited 56 times
    Holding that dis-closures of a government auditor who "was employed specifically to disclose fraud" were "nonvoluntary" and that the auditor was thus not an "original source"

  10. United States ex rel. Griffith v. Conn

    Civil No. 11-157-ART (E.D. Ky. Feb. 24, 2015)   Cited 2 times

    Civil No. 11-157-ART 02-24-2015 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. JENNIFER L. GRIFFITH and SARAH CARVER, Plaintiffs, v. ERIC C. CONN, et al., Defendants. Amul R. Thapar United States District Judge MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER *** *** *** *** When you work for the government and discover wrongdoing in your midst, may you recover as a whistleblower under the False Claims Act? On the one hand, why not? After all, government employees are often the individuals best positioned to discover wrongdoing