Subscribe

RSSAdd blog to your RSS feed

Follow Us

Twitter LinkedIn

Contributing Editors

Disclaimer
© 2017 Zuckerman Spaeder LLP
Photo of Suits by Suits
Rachel F. Cotton
Email | 202.778.1876

Rachel F. Cotton practices in the areas of complex civil litigation and white collar criminal defense. Prior to joining Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, Ms. Cotton clerked for the Hon. Diana Gribbon Motz of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and the Hon. Henry H. Kennedy Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. She previously was an associate at Covington & Burling LLP.

Showing 2 posts by Rachel F. Cotton.

June 2013 Monthly Roundup

It was the month of the Supermoon, the month Paula Deen made headlines that didn’t involve frying ‎something in butter, and the month that a bunch of lawyers up the street from our Washington headquarters, who ‎happen to wear black robes, did some significant stuff. But June also saw us write about some ‎interesting developments involving say-on-pay, American Airlines’ CEO, non-competes, arbitration, ‎and some other things—including, of course, Paula Deen:

Arbitration Clauses, State Law and Choice of Law: What May Fly for Halliburton in Texas Does Not Fly in New Mexico

Oil WellWe have had an ongoing conversation at Suits by Suits about the rapid proliferation of mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts, from the top of the company on down.  In April, we noted that one of employees’ chief strategies in trying to defeat a mandatory arbitration clause is to argue that the clause is unfair or, in legalese, “unconscionable.”  If an arbitration provision is drastically unfair to the employee, a court can strike it down under the doctrine of “unconscionability,” which permits a court to throw out a contractual provision that is so one-sided as to be “shocking to the conscience.”

The thing is, what is palatable under state law in one place may shock the conscience under state law in a different state. Read More ›