Search for Arbitration Attorneys or Arbitrators

Enter a city and state

Learn about Arbitration

Arbitration Topics

What's New at


About -

When you just can't come to an agreement, court isn't the only answer. Arbitration is an out-of-court means of dispute resolution. When parties have a disagreement, the 'arbitrator' or 'arbiter' is a neutral third-party that reviews the case to determine what action should be taken, and will determine the terms under which the dispute will be settled. The decision of the arbitrator is final, and may be legally binding or non-binding.

If you have a dispute with your employer or over a commercial contract, it is likely that arbitration is mandatory to resolve any issues. Being an easier means than taking anyone to court, arbitration is often required for resolving disputes within a company and is most often used in settling commercial disputes. Does arbitration sound like your solution? Get started today – find the arbitration attorney or arbitrator you need in any specialty, in any state.


Arbitration News

Article Image

The law firm of Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer failed in its efforts to defeat a lawsuit filed against it by two of its former partners. The former partners claimed the firm fired them for objecting to a class action settlement. A New Jersey Appellate judge affirmed a previous motion denial to compel arbitration claims lodged by the former employees.

According to court documents and the decision, there were a series of suits concerning underpayment of medical claims filed by the two former employees. They were with another firm when that occurred, but joined Wilentz Goldman in July 2007. A portion of the claims were against Aetna and filed by health care providers who claimed the companies had underpaid benefits.


Court documents stated the two attorneys objected to the settlement with Aetna and contended it was financially inadequate and was accepted by the firm just to ensure an attorney fee award. The settlement was subsequently withdrawn.


The attorney claim they were fired in June 2013 without any kind of explanation and believed it was related to the refusal to participate in the class action settlement. They filed their lawsuit under the Conscientious Employee Protection Act. The two formed a law firm after leaving Wilentz Goldman, but one later left the firm.


In response to the claim, the firm referred to part of its shareholder agreement that required employees settle disputes through arbitration in accordance with the American Arbitration Association. The attorneys argued they were not under the agreement because it did not govern post-separation disputes.