Compliance Stuff

Takeaways The Puerto Rico Supreme Court’s significant  Tucker v. Money Group  ruling holds that courts must compel arbitration, even for Puerto Rico Anti-Discrimination Act discrimination claims, when the Federal Arbitration Act applies to a valid arbitration agreement. The Puerto Rico court clarified a prior exception to this rule allowing discrimination claims to bypass arbitration applies only to unionized employees covered by collective bargaining agreements, not to individual employees. Employers should consider the importance of assessing whether their employment agreements can be read as affecting interstate commerce and drafting robust arbitration provisions. Related links Tucker v. Money Group, LLC y Otros Quiñones González v. Asociación Puerto Rico Anti-Discrimination Act Article The Puerto Rico Supreme Court issued a significant ruling in  Tucker v. Money Group, LLC ,  2026 T.S.P.R. 9 (Jan. 27, 2026), holding that individual employees who sign valid arbit...

On August 11, 2025, the Supreme Court of California ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt [ t o prevent ] a state statute requiring employers to timely pay arbitration fees or forfeit the right to arbitration . The court rejected a strict reading of the statute, finding that the law does not prevent untimely payments from being excused absent evidence of “wrongful conduct.” Quick Hits The Supreme Court of California ruled that the FAA does not preempt a state law requiring prompt payment of arbitration fees, interpreting the requirement in the context of other statutes and legal principles that may excuse an untimely payment. The court clarified that employers may not automatically forfeit their right to arbitration for late fee payments if those delays are not willful or grossly negligent. The ruling emphasizes that parties can negotiate their own payment timelines in arbitration agreements. In  Hohenshelt v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Golden St...

The Supreme Court of California is set to decide whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts a California statute that requires employers to forfeit the right to arbitrate disputes with employees if arbitration fees are not paid in a timely manner. The case could answer significant questions about the extent to which the FAA may preempt California’s laws regulating employment arbitration. Quick Hits The Supreme Court of California is poised to determine whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts a state law requiring timely payment of arbitration fees, which could significantly affect employment arbitration practices. The case arises from a dispute where a former employee sought to void arbitration after the employer paid arbitration fees after a thirty-day deadline imposed by a California statute. The outcome will clarify the interplay between federal arbitration standards and California’s efforts to regulate employment arbitration agreements and arbitration processes. The C...