for Suffolk County - Mass Cases
for Suffolk County - Mass Cases
for Suffolk County - Mass Cases
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
STATEMENT OF TAE CASE<br />
MELA adopts Defendant-Appellee Randi Simmons'<br />
stalment of the case.<br />
STATWdEWl! OF THE EACTS<br />
MELA adopts Simmons' statement of the facts.<br />
S-Y OF THE ARGUMENT<br />
The Supreme Court held, in Preston v. Ferrer, that an<br />
arbitration agreement between private parties is powerless<br />
to divest the en<strong>for</strong>cement authority of a governmental<br />
agency acting in the role of a prosecutor.<br />
would be similar to requiring the police and District<br />
Attorney not to investigate and prosecute criminal actions,<br />
based on side-agreements imposed on victims.<br />
agency is acting solely in the capacity of a neutral<br />
arbiter, then its role may be supplanted by arbitration.<br />
However, when an agency is acting as a prosecutor,<br />
protecting the public health and welfare, arbitration<br />
agreements between the private parties does not interfere<br />
with the government's police power.<br />
(8-11)<br />
A contrary rule<br />
When an<br />
Likewise, in EEOC v. Waffle House, Inc., the Supreme<br />
Court held that a private arbitration agreement will not<br />
undermine an en<strong>for</strong>cement action initiated by the Equal<br />
Employment Opportunity Commission (''EEOC") . The Court<br />
protected the EEOC's role <strong>for</strong> many reasons, including that<br />
the EEOC en<strong>for</strong>cement action was prosecuted in the EEOC's<br />
name, the EEOC sought relief in the public interest, the<br />
EEOC controlled the contours of the case and the relief<br />
3