Posted in Class Action Decisions, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged amex, amex III, arbitration waiver, AT&T Mobility, class action, class arbitration, concepcion, effective vindication, FAA, federal law of arbitrability, italian colors, oxford health, scalia, sutter on June 20, 2013|
Leave a Comment »
Those of us who have been following the Supreme Court’s decisions on class actions and arbitration over the past few years may have been a bit surprised when the Court recently upheld an arbitrator’s decision to compel class arbitration in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter. Oxford Health bucked a trend of decidedly defendant-friendly decisions on issues relating to the interplay between class actions and arbitration. Today, the Court moved back into more familiar territory in deciding American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant (“Amex III“).
The holding in Amex III, as summarized in the syllabus, is that “[t]he FAA does not permit courts to invalidate a contractual waiver of class arbitration on the ground that the plaintiff’s cost of individually arbitrating a federal statutory claim exceeds the potential recovery.” Thus, just is it had held that state law of unconscionability could not be used to invalidate a class arbitration waiver in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, the Court’s holding today limits the use of federal law to invalidate arbitration provisions that preclude class actions.
Will Amex III finally be the case to end class actions as we know them? Concepcion hasn’t, so I doubt Amex III will either.
Read Full Post »
Posted in Class Arbitration Waivers, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged american express, amex, arbitrability, arbitration, at&t, class action waiver, class arbitration, class arbitration waiver, concepcion, FAA, scalia, scotus, second circult, Supreme Court on February 28, 2013|
Leave a Comment »
In what would have been bigger class action news yesterday had the Supreme Court not issued its decision in Amgen, the Court also heard oral argument in class arbitration case, American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, No. 12-133 (click case title for a link to the transcript). The primary issue presented is whether the “federal substantive law of arbitrability” may be invoked to invalidate an arbitration agreement in a case involving federal law claims. The case will test the limits of the Supreme Court’s holding in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011) (holding that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts state laws prohibiting class arbitration waivers).
It is clear from the questions posed by the Justices that there are certain members of the Court (namely Justice Scalia, author of Concepcion) who remain steadfast in their belief that arbitration agreements that prohibit class claims are enforceable, period, and that there is another faction of the court that has serious doubts about the use of an arbitration agreement to effectively foreclose a litigant from obtaining any meaningful procedure for vindicating his or her rights. Whether this case follows Concepcion in solidifying the enforceability of class arbitration waivers or carves out an exception will likely depend on a few swing votes in the middle.
Read Full Post »
Posted in Class Action News, Class Action Trends, tagged amex, amgen, arbitrability, arbitration, bakerhostetler, behrend, CAFA, class action, class action developments, Class Action News, Class Action Trends, class arbitration waiver, collective action, comcast, data privacy, daubert, dukes, employment class action, expert witness, fraud on the market, genesis health, kiobel, knowles, oxford health, presumed reliance, reliance, rigorous analysis, securities fraud, standard fire, sutter, wal-mart, year-end review on January 28, 2013|
1 Comment »
I’m pleased to announce that the BakerHostetler Class Action Defense Team has just released its 2012 Year-end Review of Class Actions, a joint project with the firm’s Employment Class Actions, Antitrust, and Data Privacy practice teams. See below for a synopsis of the project. Click the link above to access a copy of the report itself:
We are pleased to share with you the BakerHostetler 2012 Year-end Review of Class Actions, which offers a summary of some of the key developments in class action litigation during the past year. Class action litigation continues to persist in all areas of civil litigation despite the Supreme Court’s 2011 decisions in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion and in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, which were seen by many commentators as marking the beginning of the end of class actions as we know them. But while the Supreme Court’s 2011 decisions have had a significant impact on class action litigation, they have not brought about its demise and are not likely to do so anytime soon. In the last two years, we’ve seen landmark decisions and the addition of important judicial gloss to those decisions. 2013 will be no different as the Supreme Court is set to weigh in on a series of key cases this spring.
We hope you find this Review a useful tool as you move forward into the new year. This comprehensive analysis of last year’s developments in class action procedure and jurisdiction, as well as developments by subject matter will hopefully provide context and insight as you look ahead to 2013’s expected trends in class action law, including the proliferation of privacy class action litigation and class action litigation relating to the LIBOR rate-fixing scandal.
Read Full Post »
Posted in class action reform, Class Action Trends, tagged AAA, american express, amex, arbitrability, arbitration, at&t, class arbitration waiver, concepcion, cosumer class action, federal common law, TCPA on May 10, 2012|
6 Comments »
On May 1, we received the following comment in response to a post from last May entitled Will AT&T v. Concepcion Really Kill the Consumer Class Action?
It has been almost a year. Could someone tell me, in their opinion, what effect Concepcion has had on consumer class actions over the last 11 months?
According to a recent New York Times article by David Segal titled A Rising Tide Against Class Action Suits, the effect has been significant. The article cites a report from the consummer advocacy group, Public Citizen, which found 76 opinions relying on Concepcion as a reason to prevent class actions from “moving ahead.”
I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the number of opinions cited in the Public Citizen report, and there is no doubt that Concepcion has had an impact on class action litigation, both in consumer class actions and in other subject matter areas. However, I would caution that simply looking at the number of class actions that have been unsuccessful due to class arbitration waivers does not tell the whole story. Here are a few observations to consider in assessing the impact of Concepcion:
- Concepcion has not been treated by the lower courts as foreclosing all arguments for declaring an arbitration clause invalid. A case in point is the Second Circuit’s recent decision in In re Amex III., which relied on the federal common law of arbitrability in declaring a class arbitration waiver invalid.
- Class action litigation has been on the decline in substantive areas that are not impacted by arbitration clauses, such as in securties class actions.
- There are many areas of consumer class action litigation that remain unaffected by arbitration clauses because they either involve claims where there may be no contractual relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, including statutory penalty class actions such as TCPA class actions class actions and certain data privacy class actions, or they involve areas of the law where arbitration clauses are prohibited, including many insurance class actions. A careful review of the data may show that consumer class action litigation has simply shifted to these areas.
- Recognizing that arbitration clauses do not necessarily provide a magic talisman against class action litigation and that implementing an overly consumer-friendly arbitration clause may actually encourage litigation, not all companies have rushed to adopt arbitration clauses into their consumer contracts.
In summary, I would say that while Concepcion‘s ban on state laws invalidating arbitration clauses has become an important consideration in litigating consumer class actions, it has not brought about their end.
I’d love to hear what readers have to say about their own perspectives on this issue. Please feel to comment below.
Read Full Post »