Our Services provide you with different options for sharing Your Stuff.Ĭontacts. This related information includes your profile information that makes it easier to collaborate and share Your Stuff with others, as well as things like the size of the file, the time it was uploaded, collaborators, and usage activity. To make that possible, we store, process, and transmit Your Stuff as well as information related to it.

Our Services are designed to make it simple for you to store your files, documents, comments, messages, and so on ( “Your Stuff”), collaborate with others, and work across multiple devices. Some of our Services let you access your accounts and your information via other service providers. We collect, and associate with your account, the information you provide to us when you do things such as sign up for your account, opt-in to our client newsletter or request an appointment (like your name, email address, phone number, and physical address). We collect and use the following information to provide, improve, and protect our Services:Īccount information. Here we describe how we collect, use, and handle your personal information when you use our websites, software, and services ( “Services”).

Our mission is to create a web based experience that makes it easier for us to work together.

Concepcion.Thanks for visiting our website. The Sparks case provides yet another example of California courts’ reluctance to enforce arbitration agreements, despite the United States Supreme Court decision in AT&T Mobility v.

Vista Del Mar Child & Family Services, the court held that plaintiff-employee was not bound by the arbitration clause in the employee handbook, which he had acknowledged receiving, because the “clause was included within a lengthy employee handbook the arbitration clause was not called to the attention of plaintiff, and he did not specifically acknowledge or agree to arbitration the handbook stated that it was not intended to create a contract the handbook provided that it could be amended unilaterally by defendant and thus rendered any agreement illusory the specific rules referred to in the arbitration clause were not provided to plaintiff and the arbitration clause unconscionable.” Accordingly, the court affirmed the trial court’s order denying the employer’s motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff-employee’s wrongful termination action. The California Court of Appeal, Second District, recently held that employers’ arbitration policies set forth in the employee handbook generally do not amount to an enforceable agreement between the employer and employees.

Valid arbitration agreement california