Edwards v. CVS Health Corporation

Background

Allison Edwards sued CVS Health Corporation under the New York City Human Rights Law, alleging sex and disability discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. The alleged conduct occurred during her employment at CVS. The opinion states that Edwards worked for CVS from April 2018 until January 2020, and also states that CVS told her her employment was terminated in May 2020.

CVS removed the case from New York state court based on diversity of citizenship. Edwards originally filed the case without a lawyer, and counsel later filed an amended complaint. The complaint named only CVS as a defendant.

Arbitration Agreement

Edwards signed CVS’s arbitration agreement on April 10, 2018. The agreement covered employment-related disputes, including claims for harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and termination, involving CVS or its employees and agents. It required covered claims to be resolved through final and binding arbitration rather than in court. Edwards could opt out within 30 days, but she did not do so and continued working for CVS.

CVS moved to compel arbitration and either dismiss or stay the case. Edwards did not dispute that she signed the agreement or that she was bound by it. Instead, she argued that the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 applied to her harassment claim because she filed her lawsuit after that statute took effect.

Court’s Analysis

The court concluded that the parties formed a valid and enforceable arbitration agreement. It also concluded that Edwards’s claims fell within the agreement because they arose from her employment and the termination of her employment, and because the agreement expressly covered discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims.

The court held that the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Act applies only to a dispute or claim that arose or accrued on or after March 3, 2022. The court determined that Edwards’s claims were based on conduct occurring before January 2020 and on her termination in 2020. Because the claims accrued before the statute’s effective date, the court held that the statute did not prevent enforcement of the arbitration agreement.

Motion to Amend and Remand

Edwards sought permission to file a second amended complaint adding CVS managers Andy Yearwood and Hanna Saddik as defendants. She argued that adding them would destroy diversity jurisdiction and require the case to be returned to New York state court.

The court denied that request. It found that Edwards delayed seeking to add the managers, that adding them would cause CVS delay and additional expense, and that the arbitration agreement also covered claims against CVS employees. The court further found that the timing of the request showed a purpose of defeating federal diversity jurisdiction while CVS’s arbitration motion was pending. The court stated that it was unnecessary to decide CVS’s separate argument that claims against the managers might be time-barred.

Disposition

The court granted CVS’s motion to compel arbitration. It denied CVS’s motion to dismiss, granted its alternative motion to stay the case pending arbitration, and denied Edwards’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint and to remand the case to New York state court. The court stayed all further proceedings, directed the clerk to administratively close the case, and stated that a party could move to reopen it within 30 days after the arbitration concluded.