Circuit City Stores, Inc., a Virginia Corporation v. Monir Najd

We must decide whether a claim under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act may be subject to compulsory arbitration when the employee does not allege *1106 a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

I

Circuit City Stores (“Circuit City”) hired Monir Najd as a sales associate in 1985. In 1995, Circuit City instituted the “Associate Issue Resolution Program” at Najd’s store of employment. As part of the program, Circuit City distributed a packet of materials to the store’s employees, which included a “Dispute Resolution Agreement” (the “DRA”). The DRA provided that “any and all employment-related legal disputes, controversies or claims of an Associate arising out of, or relating to, ... employment or cessation of employment with Circuit City ... shall be settled exclusively by final and binding arbitration.” The store’s current employees were allowed to opt out of the DRA by returning a form to Circuit City’s corporate headquarters. Najd acknowledged receipt of the packet in writing and did not exercise his right to opt out.

In February 1997, Alex Khorsand became Najd’s supervisor. According to Najd, Khorsand continually harassed him on the basis of his…

concurring.

I join the court’s opinion, except for the discussion of Duffield v. Robertson Stephens & Co., 144 F.3d 1182 (9th Cir.1998). The assault on the validity of Duffield is entirely unnecessary in light of the dissimilarity between the issues raised in Duf-field and those arising in the instant case. In Duffield , we held that the Civil Rights Act of 1991 precludes compulsory arbitration, as a condition of employment, of a civil rights claim brought under Title VII, id. at 1190 , and state law claims brought in conjunction with the Title VII claim, id. at 1187 n. 3. Najd did not allege a Title VII claim. Thus, there is no need to step beyond the boundaries of the case before us in search of issues that, although interesting, are irrelevant to the outcome. The majority’s attack on Duffield’s holding is merely gratuitous.

294 F.3d 1104 CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC., a Virginia corporation, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Monir NAJD, Respondent-Appellant. No. 99-56571. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted October 4, 2001. Submission Deferred October 10, 2001. Resubmitted April 18, 2002. Filed June 24, 2002. Steven L. Stern, Newport Beach, CA, argued the cause and filed a brief for the respondent-appellant. Rex Darrell Berry, Davis Grimm Payne Marra & Berry, Seattle, WA, argued the cause and filed briefs for the petitioner-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; Alicemarie H. Stotler, District Judge, Presiding. Before O'SCANNLAIN and PAEZ, Circuit Judges, and KING, District Judge. * OPINION O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge. 1 We must decide whether a claim under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act may be subject to compulsory arbitration when the employee does not allege a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. 2 * Circuit City Stores ("Circuit City") hired Monir Najd as a sales associate in 1985. In 1995, Circuit City instituted the "Associate Issue Resolution Program" at Najd's store of employment. As part of…