1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Arbitrability Is for the Arbitrator to Decide

Arbitrability Is for the Arbitrator to Decide

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.02.13

In U.S. ex rel. Beauchamp v. Academi Training Center, Inc. (E.D. Va. Mar. 29, 2013), in which C&M represented the defendant, the court, after dismissing both FCA claims a week earlier, stayed the relators' retaliation claims, despite their allegations that the arbitration provision in their independent contractor agreements were unconscionable and that arbitrability was for the court to decide. The court held that the parties had delegated the question of arbitrability to the arbitrator with "clear and unmistakable intent" by incorporating the AAA Commercial Rules into the agreements, a delegation which relators failed to challenge, thus leaving it to the arbitrator to decide whether other terms of the agreements made the arbitration provision unconscionable and unenforceable.


Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 08.03.26

New Jersey Takes Aim at Algorithmic and Surveillance Pricing: What Landlords and Retailers Need to Know About the FAIR Act and the Fair Price Protection Act

On July 20, 2026, New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed the Forbidding the Algorithmic Inflation of Rent (FAIR) Act into law, making New Jersey the fourth state to regulate algorithmic rent-setting practices. Three days later, on July 23, 2026, Governor Sherrill signed the Fair Price Protection Act, which targets “surveillance pricing”—the practice of using or collecting personal data about a user and using an algorithm or artificial intelligence to charge different consumers different prices for the same products. Together, these laws represent a significant expansion of New Jersey's consumer protection framework in the algorithmic pricing context....