General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsdlk
(11,566 posts)Skittles
(153,160 posts)cough it up!
elleng
(130,911 posts)but I'm betting the argument against private arbitration prevails.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,705 posts)The judge that denied Avenatti's request to take Trump's deposition, as I understand it, because of a procedural rule requiring a request for arbitration to be filed by Cohen first. Now that this has been done Avenatti can ask again. The contract contains an arbitration clause, but Avenatti claims the whole contract is invalid so that clause doesn't apply, but now that Cohen has requested arbitration, I think that makes it possible to go ahead and litigate the question of the validity of the contract.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)The basic upshot is that Daniels does not dispute that she agreed to arbitration, and that all of the other issues should be resolved in arbitration.
TomSlick
(11,098 posts)Republican legislation on the national level favors arbitration agreements and the federal law preempts state law protections of jury trials.
If you will take the time to read the "fine print" in many contracts - both on paper and on-line - they contain arbitration agreements. These agreements tend to be very one-sided with the party proffering the contract given the power to select the arbitrator. As a rule, consumers find that arbitration is not financially viable.
When there is a Democratic majority in Congress, this wants attention.
pbmus
(12,422 posts)HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)I'm not sure what the question is. Would have been shocked had they not filed this.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Like, have you actually looked at the contract she signed with the advice of counsel?
Heres Cohens filing. What part of it is confusing?
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4429429/4-2-18-Essential-Consultant-Motion-to-Compel.pdf