First Page
203
Last Page
232
Document Type
Note
Abstract
Part I of this article will introduce Uber and describe how the sharing economy functions. This section will explain Uber’s current conflict with their drivers regarding arbitration agreements and why the stakes are so high. Part II will explore the FAA—its history, original legislative intent and purpose—in order to provide a baseline from which to contrast its current broad application. Part III will highlight Supreme Court jurisprudence on arbitration to illustrate how the FAA is now expansively interpreted contrary to its original limited scope. This Part will culminate in an examination of the Concepcion and American Express majority and dissenting opinions. Part IV will offer an explanation for the Supreme Court’s expansive transformation of the FAA. Part V will detail pushback from the NLRB, SEC, Ninth Circuit, and California state courts. Part VI will review several California and Ninth Circuit decisions that suggest pro-arbitration attitudes are trending upwards in those jurisdictions. This Part will also anticipate the future of arbitration and where its jurisprudence is headed. Finally, Part VII will bring this analysis out of the theoretical and apply it to the litigation regarding Uber’s arbitration agreements.
Recommended Citation
Neil Eddington,
Uber Hitches a Ride with Arbitration: How Pro-Arbitration Attitudes and Uber Will Prevail in California and the Ninth Circuit,
17 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J.
203
(2017)
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/drlj/vol17/iss2/2
