that the sharing of forum fees is authorized by NASD rules, and that arbitration is generally less expensive than litigation, the assessment of half of the forum fees against Sobol will neither discourage arbitration nor offend public policy. IV. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s motion to confirm the NASD panel arbitration award is granted. Plaintiffs motion to vacate the $25,650 arbitration fee assessed against her is denied. SO ORDERED: 1 . Sobol initially commenced three actions against Kidder Peabody in federal court which were consolidated before Judge Leva! However, Sobol was required to proceed in arbitration before the NASD pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 111 S.Ct. 1647, 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991) (<HOLDING>). The NASD is a self-regulatory association of
holding that employees could be required under mandatory securities registration form to arbitrate claims brought under adea holding that a nasd member is required to arbitrate claims brought by the customer of an associated person holding unconscionable an arbitration agreement requiring employees to arbitrate claims against the employer but not requiring the employer to arbitrate claims against the employees holding no individual liability under the adea holding that mcdonnell douglas burdenshifting approach applies to claims brought under the adea