Howard v. Cartledge

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district courts may not send notice to an employee with a valid arbitration agreement unless the record shows that nothing in the agreement would prohibit that employee from participating in the collective action
• observing that “courts cannot compel individuals to arbitrate when they are yet to be identified and have not joined the suit.”
• observing that plaintiffs represented they did not intend to contest the existence, validity, or enforceability of arbitration agreements entered by proposed notice recipients
• observing that plaintiffs represented they did not intend to contest the existence, validity, or enforceability of arbitration agreements entered by proposed notice recipients
• observing that plaintiffs represented they did not intend to contest the existence, validity, or enforceability of arbitration agreements entered by proposed notice recipients
• explaining that district court lacked discretion to send notice to potential opt-in plaintiffs who had valid arbitration agreements that would prevent their participation in collective action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).