Hohenshelt v. Golden State Foods Corp.
Supreme Court of California
- Home
- Retail Litigation Center
- Hohenshelt v. Golden State Foods Corp.
Date: February 10, 2025
Question Presented: Whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California’s statute imposing monetary sanctions on companies, and allowing waiver of the enforceability of valid arbitration agreements, if the drafting party does not pay an invoice for arbitration fees within 30 days.
Summary: The RLC’s brief explains that this bright line rule treats arbitration agreements differently from other contracts reviewed under California law - a result prohibited by the FAA – and can result in egregious outcomes for mere accounting errors, late mail, or other situations in which no party or payee is harmed.
Counsel: Paul Chappell, Matt Fitzgerald, and Sabrina Beldner at RLC Law Firm Member McGuireWoods
Question Presented: Whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California’s statute imposing monetary sanctions on companies, and allowing waiver of the enforceability of valid arbitration agreements, if the drafting party does not pay an invoice for arbitration fees within 30 days.
Summary: The RLC’s brief explains that this bright line rule treats arbitration agreements differently from other contracts reviewed under California law - a result prohibited by the FAA – and can result in egregious outcomes for mere accounting errors, late mail, or other situations in which no party or payee is harmed.
Counsel: Paul Chappell, Matt Fitzgerald, and Sabrina Beldner at RLC Law Firm Member McGuireWoods