Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • PROCEDURE—2d Cir.: EEOC retains statutory investigative authority after right-to-sue letter, charging party’s suit
    • AGENCY NEWS—DOT vows to withhold funding from three states over English language requirements for commercial drivers
    • COVERAGE, LIABILITY—5th Cir.: Sexually abused student entitled to $250K verdict against school district that rehired offender
    • DISCRIMINATION—AGE—N.D. Ill.: Top sales producer, fired at age 64, cannot advance bias claim
    • DISCRIMINATION—SEX—7th Cir.: Summary judgment upheld where employee failed to present pay evidence
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—California Supreme Court Allows More Flexibility on Arbitration Fee Payment Rules
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—Employers Gain Additional Defenses in Union Salting and Deferral Cases Thanks to New Guidance from NLRB Official
    • PROCEDURE—Fla. Dist. App.: State appeals court clarifies accrual of limitations period in certain disability discrimination claims
    • STATE-LAW CLAIMS—N.C. Sup. Ct.: Statute requiring termination for recording false ‘drivers license’ information not applicable to bus driver recertification
    • WAGE-HOUR—WORKING TIME—E.D. Mo.: Healthcare facility will have to face claims employees worked through meal breaks
    • WHISTLEBLOWERS—SSA’s chief data officer blows whistle on ‘serious data security lapses’ at hands of DOGE officials, including ‘Big Balls’
    • WHITE HOUSE NEWS—President now gunning for another high-profile board member
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, EXPERT INSIGHTS—California Supreme Court Allows More Flexibility on Arbitration Fee Payment Rules, (Aug 26, 2025)

    Law Firms Mentioned:Jackson Lewis
    Organizations Mentioned:Jackson Lewis, PC

    By Scott P. Jang of Jackson Lewis P.C.

    The California Supreme Court's recent decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressed whether California's Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98, which requires the party that drafted the arbitration agreement to pay arbitration fees within 30 d ...

    By Scott P. Jang of Jackson Lewis P.C.

    The California Supreme Court's recent decision in Hohenshelt v. Superior Court addressed whether California's Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98, which requires the party that drafted the arbitration agreement to pay arbitration fees within 30 days of the due date or face consequences such as forfeiting arbitration rights, is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).

    The Court held that section 1281.98 is not preempted by the FAA but clarified that courts should not apply the statute as a rigid, automatic forfeiture rule - as many courts had been doing. Instead, courts may excuse late payments or nonpayments that are not willful, grossly negligent, fraudulent, or due to impossibility.

    For employers, this means that while timely payment of arbitration fees remains critical, an inadvertent or excusable delay will not automatically result in the loss of the right to arbitrate. The Court emphasized that the legislative intent behind section 1281.98 was to deter strategic nonpayment of fees that could stall or obstruct arbitration, not to penalize honest mistakes or excusable neglect. That said, employers should be prepared to demonstrate good faith and a lack of willfulness for any late payment or nonpayment if they seek relief from the arbitration forfeiture provisions of section 1281.98.

    Ultimately, this decision provides some flexibility to employers but reinforces the importance of diligent compliance with arbitration fee obligations to avoid unnecessary litigation over the right to arbitrate.

    The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

    Scott P. Jang

    Jackson Lewis P.C.

    666 3rd Ave 28th Floor

    New York, NY 10017 United States

    Tel.: +1 212 545 4000

    E-mail: myupdates@jacksonlewis.com

    URL: www.jacksonlewis.com/

    © Mondaq Ltd, 2025 - Tel. +44 (0)20 8544 8300 - http://www.mondaq.com

    Attorneys: Scott P. Jang (Jackson Lewis).

    ExpertInsights: ExpertInsights Arbitration StateRegulations IndustryNewsTrends

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use