Faine Davis v. Nordstrom, Inc.

Following the United States Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 1740 , 179 L.Ed.2d 742 (2011), Appellant Nord-strom, Inc. (“Nordstrom”) made revisions to the employee arbitration policy contained in its employee handbook. These changes precluded employees from bringing most class action lawsuits. Despite these changes, weeks later, Nordstrom employee Fame Davis filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of herself and other similarly situated employees, alleging that Nordstrom violated various state and federal employment laws.

In time, Nordstrom, relying on the revised arbitration policy in its employee handbook sought to compel Davis to submit to individual arbitration of her claims. The district court held that Davis and Nordstrom did not enter into a valid arbitration agreement with respect to the revision, and therefore denied Nordstrom’s motion to compel arbitration. Nordstrom appeals the district court’s decision. Because we find that Nordstrom and Davis did indeed enter into a valid agreement to arbitrate disputes on an individual basis; we REVERSE the district court and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this…