Total Articles: 2
arbitrating discrimination claims in minnesota: a bump in the road.
Discusses Correll v. Distinctive Dental Services, P.A., in which the Minnesota Supreme Court held that the "exclusivity" provision of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Section 363.11)precludes arbitration of pending human rights act claim.
arbitrating discrimination claims: has its time come.
Discusses Correll v. Distinctive Dental Services, P.A., in which the Minnesota Court of Appeals required submission of plaintiff's discrimination claim to arbitration. [Appears that the case was subsequently reversed. See Correll v. Distinctive Dental Services, P.A., C7-98-2251 (Minn. March 16, 2000) (plaintiff entitled to a stay of arbitration because section 363.11 of the human rights act precludes arbitration of pending human rights act claim).
