Employment & Labor Law
Please select a topic from the drop down list
Lemmon v. Lincoln Property Co.
17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D417a (M.D. Fla. February 23, 2004)
Ms. Lemmon alleged she was discriminated against because of her age in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act. Defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration. Ms. Lemmon argued the arbitration agreement she entered into with Lincoln was invalid and unenforceable because it was vague and did not properly set forth the claims that would be covered by the agreement so as to generally and fairly inform the employee that it covered statutory claims. The court disagreed, finding the agreement did not contain any limitation of remedies or otherwise ambiguous language that might make the agreement unenforceable. An arbitration agreement need not specifically set out each and every claim that is covered by the agreement. Secondly, Ms. Lemmon argued that no arbitration agreement between her and Lincoln existed because the two forms she signed only acknowledged that the arbitration agreement was contained in the employee handbook. Because Lincoln reserved the right to modify the handbook, the agreement was unenforceable. Again the court disagreed, holding that, even though Lincoln retained the right to alter the handbook, they could not unilaterally alter the agreement to arbitrate.
Topic(s)
