![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
December 2, 2003, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California ; March 16, 2004, Filed
[*1150] LEAVY, Circuit Judge:
The issue presented is whether we have appellate jurisdiction to review the district court's order denying arbitration in one forum requested by the appellant when the same order also compels arbitration in an alternate forum requested by the appellant. Because the district court ordered arbitration pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 4, its order is not appealable under 9 U.S.C. § 16(b)(2), we have no jurisdiction, and the appeal is dismissed.
Credit Suisse First Boston ("CSFB") hired Richard Bushley in 1998 as a sales assistant in its Technology Private Client Services Group. CSFB terminated Bushley for cause in June [**2] 2001. The termination followed a federal investigation regarding CSFB's internal policies for commission sales of stock in initial public offerings. CSFB paid substantial fines as a result of the investigation. In October 2002, Bushley filed this action in the California Superior Court for wrongful termination, libel and slander, and for injunctive relief under California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq.
CSFB removed the action to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 based upon diversity jurisdiction. CSFB then petitioned to compel arbitration under 9 U.S.C. § 4 and to stay the proceedings pending arbitration under 9 U.S.C. § 3, or in the alternative, to dismiss the action pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). CSFB filed declarations in support of its petition stating that Bushley's claims were subject to arbitration before the National Association of Securities Dealers ("NASD"). CSFB asserted that Bushley signed a "Form U-4 Uniform Application for Securities Industry Regulation" ("Form U-4") containing an arbitration agreement that [**3] required arbitration before the NASD. CSFB also asserted that Bushley's claims were subject to arbitration under CSFB's Employment Dispute Resolution Program ("EDR program").
[*1151] Bushley opposed the petition, arguing that there was no contract obligating him to submit to NASD arbitration. Bush-ley filed a declaration admitting that he signed the Form U-4 attached as Exhibit D to the declaration of CSFB's Director and Counsel in its Legal and Compliance Division. Form U-4 required arbitration of disputes under the rules of one or more organizations checkmarked in Section 10 of the Form U-4. The Form U-4 attached as Exhibit D to CSFB's declaration, however, had no organization checkmarked in Section 10. Bushley also declared that he did not agree to be subject to the EDR program.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
360 F.3d 1149 *; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 4881 **
RICHARD SCOTT BUSHLEY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant-Appellant.
Prior History: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. D.C. No. CV-02-05527-SBA. Saundra B. Armstrong, District Judge, Presiding.
Disposition: Appeal dismissed.
arbitration, district court, compel arbitration, parties, declaration, checkmarked
Business & Corporate Compliance, Pretrial Matters, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Mandatory ADR, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Arbitration, General Overview, Judicial Review, Federal Arbitration Act, International Trade Law, Dispute Resolution, International Commercial Arbitration, Arbitration, Securities Law, Regulators, Self-Regulating Entities, National Association of Securities Dealers, Entry of Judgments, Stays of Judgments, Stay Pending Arbitration, Appellate Jurisdiction, Final Judgment Rule, Arbitrability, Foreign Arbitral Awards, Orders to Compel Arbitration, International Trade Law, International Commercial Arbitration