Supreme Court to Take Up Pair of Conflicting Arbitration Rulings | New Jersey Law Journal

Supreme Court to Take Up Pair of Conflicting Arbitration Rulings | New Jersey Law Journal

The New Jersey Supreme Court has agreed to hear appeals in a pair of conflicting arbitration rulings over whether the New Jersey Arbitration Act applies to employees who are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act.

In Arafa v. Health Express, the Appellate Division held in an unpublished June 5 decision that a mandatory arbitration agreement does not apply to wage-and-hour claims by truck drivers who deliver pharmaceuticals under §1 of the Federal Arbitration Act, which exempts certain workers from arbitration if their jobs involve foreign or interstate commerce.

The other case, Colon v. Strategic Delivery Solutions, also concerns truck drivers bringing wage-and-hour claims. A different panel of the Appellate Division, in a published ruling on June 4, sent the case back to a trial court for a determination on whether plaintiffs were engaged in interstate commerce and, therefore, exempt from arbitration under §1 of the FAA. The panel in Colon also said that if the FAA doesn’t apply, the New Jersey Arbitration Act applies and requires arbitration. The FAA exemption that applied to plaintiffs in the Arafa and Colon cases was spelled out by the U.S. Supreme Court in a January ruling, New Prime v. Oliveira....