No. 20-15

Pennymac Financial Services, Inc., et al. v. Erich Heidrich, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-07-10
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: 28-usc-1738 enforcement-of-agreement fair-labor-standards-act federal-arbitration-act federal-substantive-law individualized-arbitration state-court-decision state-law statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Arbitration WageAndHour Privacy ClassAction JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Federal Arbitration Act requires enforcement of an arbitration agreement as applied to Fair Labor Standards Act claims where the parties' agreement requires individualized arbitration, and if so, whether 28 U.S.C. § 1738 requires a contrary result based on a state court decision finding an identical agreement unenforceable under a state law rule that is plainly invalid under the FAA and federal substantive law interpreting the FAA

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the Federal Arbitration Act requires enforcement of an arbitration agreement as applied to Fair Labor Standards Act claims where the parties’ agreement requires individualized arbitration, and if so, whether 28 U.S.C. § 1738 requires a contrary result based on a state court decision finding an identical agreement unenforceable under a state law rule that is plainly invalid under the FAA and federal substantive law interpreting the FAA.

Docket Entries

2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-27
Waiver of right of respondent Erich Heidrich, et al. to respond filed.
2020-07-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 10, 2020)

Attorneys

Erich Heidrich, et al.
Christopher D. BakerBaker Curtis & Schwartz, P.C., Respondent
Christopher D. BakerBaker Curtis & Schwartz, P.C., Respondent
Pennymac Financial Services, Inc, et al.
James Allen BowlesHill Farrer & Burrill LLP, Petitioner
James Allen BowlesHill Farrer & Burrill LLP, Petitioner