Richard Oldroyd v. Elmira Savings Bank, Fsb

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that claims were within the scope of an arbitration clause because the claims “touched upon matters covered by the ... agreement” containing the clause
• holding that for Title VII claims, arbitration must offer “all of the types of relief that would otherwise be available in court”
• concluding that claims were within the scope of an arbitration clause because the claims \touched upon matters covered by the . . . agreement\ containing the clause
• finding that because plaintiff alleged he was terminated under circumstances that gave rise to a retaliatory discharge claim, the claim touched matters covered by the employment contract and thus was within the scope of the contract’s arbitration clause
• finding agreement “fundamentally at odds with the purposes of Title VII because it completely proscribes an arbitral award of Title VII damages”
• reversing a district court's determination that a retaliatory discharge claim was not within the scope of a broad arbitration clause, based in part on the presumption of arbitrability

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).