Search results
Oct 2, 2017 · Holding: Congress has instructed in the Federal Arbitration Act that arbitration agreements providing for individualized proceedings must be enforced, and neither the Arbitration Act’s saving clause nor the National Labor Relations Act suggests otherwise. Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch on May 21, 2018.
- Background
- Petitioner's Challenge
- Certiorari Granted
- Outcome
- See Also
As a condition of employment to work with Ernst and Young, Stephen Morris and a colleague, Kelly McDaniel, were required to sign agreements that mandated any work-related claims be submitted to individual arbitration. The agreements contained a waiver against any concerted action; that is, the employees could neither initiate nor join any class act...
Ernst and Young LLP, the petitioner, challenged the holding of the Ninth Circuit. Ernst and Young argued that its arbitration waiver was consistent with Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act and, if not, that the waiver must still be enforced under the Federal Arbitration Act.
On September 8, 2016, Ernst and Young, the petitioner, initiated proceedings in the Supreme Court of the United States in filing a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Ninth Circuit. The U.S. Supreme Court granted Ernst and Young's certiorari request on January 13, 2017, consolidating arguments in the case with arguments in Epic Systems Corpora...
Decision
On a vote of 5 - 4, the Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the Ninth Circuit. The Supreme Court held that under the Arbitration Act, agreements to arbitrate must be enforced.
Majority opinion
Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the opinion for the court majority, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Clarence Thomas. Gorsuch began by framing what he saw as the question at the heart of the case: whether employers and employees can contract to require arbitraiton, or whether an employee may always bring a collective action regardless of an agrement to arbitrate individually. Gorsuch ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to en...
Concurrence by Justice Thomas
Justice Clarence Thomasjoined the majority opinion in full and also wrote separately. Thomas wrote, "I write separately to add that the employees also cannot prevail under the plain meaning of the Federal Arbitration Act."
Aug 22, 2016 · Justia Opinion Summary. Plaintiffs Morris and McDaniel filed suit against Ernst & Young, alleging that the company misclassified Morris and similarly situated employees and denied overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq., and California laws.
Dec 26, 2017 · This year Ernst & Young v. Morris (“ Morris ”), an employment class action waiver case involving the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), will take center stage as the very first case to be argued in front of the brand-new court.
Oct 2, 2016 · May 21, 2018. The Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision addressing whether the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) bars arbitration provisions in employment contracts that include class action waivers. By a 5-4 vote, the Court ruled in favor of employers, affirming the validity of employment agreements that require individual arbitration.
Aug 22, 2016 · 147 Citing Cases. From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research. Morris v. Ernst & Young, LLP. Download. PDF. Check. Treatment. Summary. holding arbitration provisions mandating individual arbitration of employment-related claims violate the NLRA and fall within the FAA's saving clause.
Jul 9, 2013 · Plaintiffs Stephen Morris ("Morris") and Kelly McDaniel ("McDaniel"), former EY employees, claim that EY unlawfully classified them and other individuals as exempt from federal and California overtime laws. On January 11, 2013, defendants Ernst & Young LLP and Ernst & Young U.S., LLP, (collectively "EY" or "defendants") moved to dismiss the ...
