FERC enforcement staff alleges that the Respondents engaged in physical trades of natural gas at four of the most heavily traded hubs in the southwestern United States during “bidweek”—the last five business days of the month which are used by certain publications to calculate monthly index prices—in order to benefit derivatives positions held by the company. According to the order to show cause, before and during each bidweek during the relevant period, TGPNA accumulated large positions of physical and financial natural gas products tied to monthly index prices. During each bidweek, TGPNA would then trade a dominant share of monthly physical fixed-price natural gas to either inflate or suppress prices (depending on the nature of TGPNA’s financial position) and then report the trades for inclusion in the calculation of monthly index prices. … [Read more...] about FERC Proceeds With Enforcement Action Against Total Gas & Power North America
North america
Hurst v. Nissan North America, Inc. — Rare Outright Reversal of a Judgment for Plaintiffs in MMPA Class Action
The circuit court erred in denying Nissan's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict because Hurst failed to show that Nissan made an actionable misrepresentation in connection with the FX's advertising. The statements relied upon by plaintiff were not actionable statements of fact as required by the MMPA. As to attorney's fees, the MMPA authorizes attorney's fees to the prevailing party. Because Hurst and the class he represents are no longer the prevailing party, attorney's fees are no longer authorized. … [Read more...] about Hurst v. Nissan North America, Inc. — Rare Outright Reversal of a Judgment for Plaintiffs in MMPA Class Action
EEOC Sues Volvo Group North America, LLC, For Disability Discrimination
However, when Files informed the company nurse he was taking medically prescribed suboxone during his post-offer physical examination, the nurse informed him Volvo viewed suboxone as a narcotic worse than heroin. When Files reported for his first day of work days later, Volvo's human resources representative informed him they could not hire him because of his suboxone use, the EEOC charges. … [Read more...] about EEOC Sues Volvo Group North America, LLC, For Disability Discrimination
Altering Arbitration Rules: Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America
As such, the Ninth Circuit panel held that the FAA did not preempt the California rule announced in Iskanian. The panel opined that following the logic of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, the Iskanian rule is a “generally applicable” contract defense that may be preserved by the FAA’s § 2 savings clause, provided it did not conflict with the FAA’s purposes. Further, the panel found the Iskanian Rule did not conflict with the FAA’s purposes. The court stated that "[I]n sum, the Iskanian rule does not conflict with the FAA, because it leaves parties free to adopt the kinds of informal procedures normally available in arbitration. It only prohibits them from opting out of the central feature of the PAGA’s private enforcement scheme–the right to act as a private attorney general to recover the full measure of penalties the state could recover.” Thus, the panel’s majority suggests that an arbitration policy potentially be … [Read more...] about Altering Arbitration Rules: Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America
Altering Arbitration: Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America
Mr. Sakkab filed the complaint in San Diego against defendant, alleging that the LensCrafters franchise misclassified employees. Citing a dispute-resolution agreement, defendant successfully compelled arbitration. Though Mr. Sakkab did not dispute that his employment claims were arbitrable, Mr. Sakkab argued that the portion of the arbitration agreement prohibiting him from bringing any PAGA claims on behalf of other employees was unenforceable under California law. Though the U.S. Supreme Court found in Concepcion v. AT&T Corp. ,131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011) that the Federal Arbitration Act pre-empts California’s law on unconscionable contracts, the California Supreme Court announced the rule in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014) that barred the waiver of representative claims under PAGA. As such, the 9th Circuit panel held that the Federal Arbitration Act did not preempt the California rule announced … [Read more...] about Altering Arbitration: Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America
