McNulty v. Prudential-Bache Securities

2 Citing cases

  1. Shaffer v. ACS Government Services, Inc.

    321 F. Supp. 2d 682 (D. Md. 2004)   Cited 55 times
    Explaining that state-law principles apply to the issue of contract formation while federal substantive law applies to the issue of arbitrability

    As a preliminary matter, this Court agrees with the Eastern District of New York's determination that claims under the Jury System Improvement Act are subject to arbitration under the FAA. See McNulty v. Prudential-Bache Securities, 871 F. Supp. 567 (E.D.N.Y. 1994). As that Court concluded, "[t]here is no evidence in the statute's text or legislative history that Congress intended to remove claims under the Jurors' Act from arbitration; nor is there an inherent conflict between arbitration and the purposes of the Act."

  2. Maye v. Smith Barney Inc.

    897 F. Supp. 100 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)   Cited 40 times
    Holding employees in Smith Barney's purchasing department to be in an employment relationship involving commerce

    Gilmer, 500 U.S. at 26-27, 111 S.Ct. at 1652. See also Bird v. Shearson Lehman/American Express, Inc., 926 F.2d 116, 119 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1251, 111 S.Ct. 2891, 115 L.Ed.2d 1056 (1991); McNulty v. Prudential-Bache Sec., 871 F. Supp. 567, 569 (E.D.N.Y. 1994). Plaintiffs' only effort with regard to legislative history is to cite the same sources that the Ninth Circuit relied upon in Lai. As discussed above, the two statements cited in that case are insufficient to contradict the seemingly unambiguous Congressional endorsement of arbitration in ยง 118 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Concerning any inherent inconsistency between compelled arbitration and the underlying framework and purposes of Title VII, Plaintiffs' only assertion is that as unsophisticated entry level employees they would be at an unfair disadvantage in arbitration before the NYSE, a body in which Smith Barney wields great power as a member organization.