On October 7, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a California Court of Appeal ruling inconsistent with the Federal Arbitration Act. Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc., 24 Cal. 4th 83 (2000), creates special contract defenses that govern only arbitration clauses. The federal Supreme Court has repeatedly declared that an arbitration clause must be treated like any other contract, yet the California courts have continued to apply Armendariz. The Court of Appeal here used Armendariz to void an arbitration agreement between a law firm and one of its former partners. In its brief, WLF reviewed the California courts’ history of failing to faithfully apply the Supreme Court’s FAA rulings. WLF also explored the variety of ways in which the California courts exhibit bias against arbitration clauses.


June 17, 2019 cert-stage brief