Zuver v. Airtouch Communications, Inc.
Washington Supreme Court
103 P.3d 753 (2004)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Therese Zuver (plaintiff) was an employee of Airtouch Communications, Inc. (Airtouch) (defendant). Airtouch offered Zuver a position as a sales-support representative on April 10, 1997. As a condition of employment, Airtouch required Zuver to enter into several agreements, including an agreement to arbitrate any claims related to her employment. The arbitration agreement was a separate attachment and was presented in a similar manner as each of the other agreements. The arbitration agreement contained a confidentiality provision, an attorneys’ fees provision, and a limitation of Airtouch’s liability. The arbitration agreement also required Zuver to split the cost of the arbitrator and contained a clause requiring that any unenforceable provisions be severed from the agreement and the remaining terms enforced. Zuver accepted the agreement on April 25, 1997. Zuver had a medical condition that worsened over time and eventually caused her to take medical leave. After Zuver was on medical leave for approximately nine months, Airtouch terminated her employment. Zuver sued Airtouch for disability discrimination. Airtouch moved to compel arbitration, and the trial court granted the motion. Zuver appealed to the Washington Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bridge, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
