Please read the Circuit City v Saint Clair Adams case and answer the following questions:
1) Are you in favor of the court's decision?
2) Are the statutory rights of employees adequately protected through arbitration?
3) Was there any merit to the reasoning of the ninth circuit court?
4) What about an employee's right to a jury trial?
I provided an overview of the case, several references, and answered the questions. If you need further clarification, please ask. Please apply your class lectures and text notes to make this focus on the expectations of the class.
In Circuit City v Saint Clair Adams, the court had to decide if the employee was entitled to avoid arbitration in order to file for damages in civil court. The Supreme Court, like the other appeals courts, found Adams did not qualify under the Federal Arbitration Act Clause that "the FAA's coverage "contracts of employment of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce." The Supreme court had to decide if the scope of the clause included all employee contracts.
In this case, during the application process, Adams agreed in the application to binding arbitration by a neutral arbitrator in case of a dispute. After being hired as a sales counselor, Adams filed a dispute of employee discrimination in the Circuit Court of California, which is a state court. Circuit City filed a suit in federal court (District Court) to have the state court enjoined and the case forced into ...
The following problems helps to answer questions about a case study: Circuit City v Saint Clair Adams.