Catherine Ingle v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., a Virginia Corporation

Caution
2003 Daily Journal DAR 5097·328 F.3d 1165·2003 WL 21058241·84 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,386·91 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1426
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 13, 200399-56570California6,908 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pregerson, J.

This appeal arises from the district court’s denial of defendant-appellant Circuit City Stores, Inc.’s (Circuit City) motion to compel arbitration. Circuit City moved to compel arbitration in response to the action plaintiff-appellee Catherine In-gle filed in the Southern District of California, in which she alleged employment discrimination in violation of state and federal civil rights statutes. Circuit City argues on appeal that the district court erred in declining to enforce an arbitration agreement requiring Ingle and Circuit City to arbitrate employment-related legal claims. We have jurisdiction under 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a), and we affirm.

FACTS and PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In September 1996, Catherine Ingle applied to become an Associate at a Circuit City electronics retail store in San Diego County, California. Ingle was required to sign an arbitration agreement for Circuit City to consider her employment application. By signing the arbitration agreement, Ingle agreed to resolve all employment-related legal claims through arbitration.

On June 21, 1999, Ingle filed this action against Circuit City in the Southern District of California. In her complaint, Ingle alleged claims of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.