Cohen v. UBS Fin. Svc., No. 14-781 (2d Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff, a financial advisor employed by UBS, filed a putative class action and collective action against UBS, asserting wage-and-hour claims under federal and state law. On appeal, plaintiff challenged the district court's grant of defendants' motion to compel arbitration before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), and from the subsequent order of the district court denying his motion for reconsideration. The court held that enforcement of the UBS Compensation Plan would not be “contrary” to Rule 13204 because the Rule bars neither the enforcement of pre‐dispute waivers of class and collective action procedures nor the arbitration of plaintiff’s individual claims. Because plaintiff concedes that his claims under California's Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act, Cal. Lab. Code 2699, are untimely, the court need not decide whether this doctrine of California law is consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. 2 et seq. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
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.