Catherine Ingle v. Circuit City, a Virginia Corporation

Good Law
408 F.3d 592·2005 WL 1163209·95 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1290·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 8875
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 18, 200504-55927California1,292 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pregerson, J.

In this appeal we consider Circuit City’s renewed petition to compel arbitration, in which it again asks the district court to compel former employee Catherine Ingle to arbitrate her employment-related claims. In Ingle v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 328 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir.2003) Cingle I ”), we held that Circuit City’s arbitration agreement with Ingle, which required her to arbitrate any employment-related claims as a condition of employment, was procedurally and substantively unconscionable under California contract law, and thus unenforceable. Accordingly, we affirmed the district court’s denial of Circuit City’s motion to compel arbitration of In-gle’s state and federal employment discrimination and harassment claims. On January 26, 2004, the Supreme Court denied Circuit City’s petition for a writ of certiorari. See Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Ingle, 540 U.S. 1160 , 124 S.Ct. 1169 , 157 L.Ed.2d 1204 (2004).

Less than a month after the .parties returned'to the district court to litigate Ingle’s discrimination and harassment claims, Circuit City filed a renewed petition to compel arbitration. In its petition, Circuit City argued that this court’s en banc decision in EEOC v. Luce,…

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.