Guyden v. Aetna, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that an “attack on [a] confidentiality provision is, in part, an attack on the character of arbitration itself”
• finding that Congress did not intend for claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to be non-arbitrable
• rejecting whistleblower’s argument that she should be able to inform co- workers of her claim
• “[C]onfidentiality clauses are so common in the arbitration context that [an] attack on the confidentiality provision is, in part, an attack on the character of arbitration itself.”
• “[I]f some, but not all, of the claims in the case are arbitrable, [a court] must then decide whether to stay the balance of the proceedings pending arbitration.”
• Section 1514A “protects ‘employees when they take lawful acts to disclose information or otherwise assist . . . in detecting and stopping actions which they reasonably believe to be fraudulent.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).