Signage is seen outside of the law firm Dentons in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 30, 2020. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly
(Reuters) - Deep into a multi-jurisdictional fight with an ex-partner over a big-dollar contingency fee, international law firm Dentons told a California appellate court last week that a U.S. Supreme Court’s month-old ruling dooms its ex-partner’s attempt to evade key provisions in his partnership agreement.
In the new filing, Dentons’ counsel at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher argued that Viking River Cruises Inc v. Moriana — in which the Supreme Court held that employers can require workers to arbitrate individual claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act — adds to a long line of cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned California state court rulings that vitiated arbitration provisions on the basis that California cannot create “needless conflict” with the Federal Arbitration Act.
But ex-Dentons partner Jinshu Zhang contested his former firm’s insistence on the significance of Viking River precedent in his July 8 filing at the appeals court. Viking River, according to Zhang counsel Daniel Csillag of Murphy Rosen is, in fact, irrelevant to the case before the state appellate judges.
“Mr. Zhang’s petition is not about arbitrability or about the enforceability of any purported arbitration clauses, which, procedurally, distinguishes our case form every case Dentons cites,” Csillag told me via email. “The FAA and Viking River are non-issues....
A hotel on one the A127 has issued a statement after what it described as "false and misleading" claims were shared on social media. The Palms Hotel, on Southend Arterial Road (A127) in Hornchurch...