Carstens, Inc., Dba Carstens Health Industries, Inc., Anillinois Corporation, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Jane Mckenzie, Individual, Defendant-appellee, 87 F.3d 1317 (9th Cir. 1996)

 Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 87 F.3d 1317 (9th Cir. 1996) Submitted June 14, 1996. *Decided June 19, 1996

Before: SNEED, PREGERSON and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM** 

The arbitration clause did not cover McKenzie's claims. FEHA claims and intentional torts are neither "dispute [s] concerning interpretation of" nor "transaction [s] contemplated by" the contract. Nor is McKenzie's status as an employee or an independent contractor subject to arbitration because it isn't a question governed by the terms of the contract. Rather, it turns on a multi-factor, factual determination governed by California law. See Cal.Lab.Code § 3353; Cal.Code Regs. tit. 2, § 7286.5(b); S.G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Indus. Relations, 48 Cal. 3d 341, 349 (1989).

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.