Contact us with your California corporate & securities law questions (949) 353-6347 or Contact us here

Has Nevada Banned Mandatory Arbitration Provisions In Articles And Bylaws?

Recently, I wrote about Nevada's enactment of legislation that will permit a Nevada corporation to include in its articles of incorporation a provision requiring any, all or certain internal actions must be brought solely or exclusively in the court or courts specified in the requirement, which must include at least one court in Nevada.  Any such provision must be "not inconsistent with" applicable jurisdictional requirements.  The legislation defines "court" to mean any court of:

"(1) This State [Nevada], including, without limitation, those courts in any county having a business court, as that term is defined in NRS 13.050;
(2) A state other than this State [Nevada]; or
(3) The United States.

Noticeably absent is any mention of arbitration.  If the statute is interpreted under the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, it seems that by authorizing exclusive judicial fora, the legislature has prohibited arbitral fora.  

 

Share on:

Nevada Corporations

ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING CALIFORNIA CORPORATE AND SECURITIES LAW? CONTACT US DIRECTLY

We offer expert advice with the intricacies of California law.

Our years of experience and expertise allow us to help clients navigate the business laws in California.

CONTACT US

Get the latest news and analysis about California Corporate & Securities law. Subscribe to our newsletter today!

We respect your email privacy

ABOUT OUR AUTHOR

30172DBAB0084D3A8F39D7AF0A8E79BC.ashx Keith Paul Bishop
Partner at Allen Matkins
(949) 353-6328
 Contact me
Learn More About Keith

RECOGNITION

NationalLawReview

badge-author-large

nominee-badge

Get the latest news and analysis about California Corporate & Securities law. Subscribe to our newsletter today!

We respect your email privacy

CATEGORIES

see all

YOUTUBE

FACEBOOK