Also known as: accordant
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
2 senses
An agreement under which an obligee promises to accept a stated performance in satisfaction of the obligor's existing duty. Performance of the accord discharges the original duty.
The granting of complete relief among existing parties to an action when determining whether a nonparty must be joined.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
An agreement under which an obligee promises to accept a stated performance in satisfaction of the obligor's existing duty. Performance of the accord discharges the original duty.
Aaron Adams sold land to Alexandra Armstrong after stating the soil was stable for building. Soil tests later showed instability that existed at the time of sale. The statement failed to match the actual condition of the property.
The President issued an order limiting entry from several majority-Muslim countries and cited national security concerns. Challengers attacked the order on Establishment Clause grounds. Courts applied rational basis review because of the foreign affairs context.
The granting of complete relief among existing parties to an action when determining whether a nonparty must be joined.
BlueWave Imports sued OceanReach Lines for damage to machinery during overseas shipment. OceanReach asserted that HarborLift Stevedoring shared responsibility for the loss because of how the cargo was loaded. The court ordered HarborLift joined because without it the court could not fully allocate liability and costs between the parties already before it.
1 common questions
Mountain Learning contracted with the City of Roswell to provide online tutoring. Both parties assumed the district's internet could handle simultaneous video sessions for all expected students. The assumption proved false when the infrastructure proved inadequate.
A union sued an employer to enforce a collective bargaining agreement in federal court. The employer argued the agreement lacked binding force. The court held that federal law supplied the remedy to make such agreements enforceable.
In 1953 the Textile Workers Union of America entered into a collective bargaining agreement with Lincoln Mills of Alabama. The agreement was to run for one year and from year to year thereafter unless terminated on specified notices. It contained a no-strike clause and established a multi-step grievance procedure whose final step, available to either party, was arbitration. Several grievances concerning work loads and work assignments arose under the agreement. The union processed the grievances through every step of the contractual procedure, after which the employer denied them. The union then requested arbitration, but the employer refused. The union filed suit in federal district court seeking an order compelling the employer to arbitrate the grievances. The district court held that it possessed jurisdiction and directed the employer to comply with the arbitration provisions of the agreement. On appeal the Court of Appeals reversed by a divided vote, concluding that the district court lacked authority under either federal or state law to grant the requested relief. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. After the Court of Appeals decision but before oral argument, Lincoln Mills terminated its operations, ceased all work at the mill in March 1957, and contracted to sell its mill properties. Some of the grievances sought back pay for increased workloads, and the collective bargaining agreement authorized the arbitration board to adjust compensation retroactively.
View caseAn employee sued a retail employer for employment claims. The employer moved to compel arbitration under a signed agreement. The court construed the statute to exclude only specific transportation workers from the arbitration requirement.
In October 1995, Saint Clair Adams applied for a job at Circuit City Stores, Inc., a national retailer of consumer electronics. Adams signed an employment application that included a provision stating he would settle any and all previously unasserted claims, disputes or controversies arising out of or relating to his application or candidacy for employment, employment and/or cessation of employment with Circuit City exclusively by final and binding arbitration before a neutral Arbitrator, with examples including claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, the Americans with Disabilities Act, contract law, and tort law. Adams was hired as a sales counselor in Circuit City's store in Santa Rosa, California. Two years later Adams filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against Circuit City in California state court asserting claims under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act and other claims based on general tort theories under California law. Circuit City filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California seeking to enjoin the state-court action and to compel arbitration of Adams's claims pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act. The district court entered an order concluding that Adams was obligated by the arbitration agreement to submit his claims to binding arbitration. Adams appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. While the appeal was pending the Ninth Circuit ruled in an unrelated case that the Federal Arbitration Act does not apply to contracts of employment. Following that ruling the Ninth Circuit held in Adams's case that the arbitration agreement was contained in a contract of employment and therefore was not subject to the Federal Arbitration Act. Circuit City petitioned the Supreme Court for review noting that the Ninth Circuit's conclusion that all employment contracts are excluded from the Federal Arbitration Act conflicts with every other Court of Appeals to have addressed the question. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the issue.
View case2 common questions
An accord itself does not discharge the duty. Discharge occurs only upon performance of the accord, which is called satisfaction.
A mistake is a belief that does not match the facts. A misrepresentation is an assertion that does not match the facts.
Joinder ensures the court can fully resolve the dispute between the parties already before it in a single judgment rather than leaving the allocation incomplete.
…Court of Justice was the proper forum for determining the entire controversy, including its own right to limited liability, in accord with the contractual forum clause. Unterweser later counterclaimed, setting forth the same contractual cause of action as in its English action and a further cause of action for salvage…