Taylor v. Federal National Mortgage Association
839 F. Supp. 2d 259
D.D.C.2012Background
- Taylor sues Fannie Mae for retaliation under Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley or, alternatively, First Amendment grounds if Fannie Mae is a government employer.
- Taylor exhausted administrative remedies with OSHA before filing suit in this Court on June 28, 2011, then amended on November 15, 2011.
- Taylor alleges retaliation for reporting fraudulent data to federal regulators and seeks enforcement of legal rights related to employment termination.
- Defendants assert an arbitration agreement requires dismissal or arbitration, not litigation, of the claims at issue.
- The dispute centers on whether the Dodd-Frank Act’s revised Sarbanes-Oxley provisions apply retroactively to compel arbitration under the FAA.
- The court ultimately compels arbitration and dismisses the SOX/Dodd-Frank and wrongful termination claims, with the First Amendment claim dismissed without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Dodd-Frank §922 retroactively affects SOX claims arbitration | Taylor contends §922 retroactivity undermines contractual arbitration rights | Fannie Mae argues retroactivity is warranted under Landgraf framework | Retroactivity not applied; arbitration compelled for SOX/DOJ claims |
| Whether the arbitration agreement is enforceable and covers the claims | Taylor argues the agreement should not bar his claims | Defendants argue the agreement is valid and broad in scope | Arbitration clause valid and enforceable under FAA; covers the relevant claims |
| Whether the First Amendment claim is arbitrable or should be pursued in arbitration | First Amendment claim should proceed if not barred by arbitration | Claim falls within the arbitration agreement scope | First Amendment claim dismissed without prejudice pending arbitration |
Key Cases Cited
- Landgraf v. USI Film Prod., 511 U.S. 244 (U.S. 1994) (presumption against retroactive application of statutes; determine temporal reach)
- Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1983) (federal policy favoring arbitration; enforceability anchored in contract)
- Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79 (U.S. 2002) (gateway arb. issue is judicial question)
- AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Commc'ns Workers, 475 U.S. 643 (U.S. 1986) (question of arbitrability for court)