A court cannot invalidate a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement on the ground that it may leave a party unable to vindicate its statutory
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument yesterday in the first of two cases to be argued this term again raising questions regarding the
In a shot across the bow of recent Supreme Court precedent in favor of arbitration, the Second Circuit has held that a mandatory class action waiver in an arbitration provision is unenforceable where the plaintiffs established that the practical effect of enforcement of the waiver would be to preclude claims under federal antitrust statutes.
On April 27, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court held in a 5-4 decision that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempted California’s Discover Bank rule, which deemed unenforceable most mandatory consumer arbitration agreements that include class-action waivers.
In a much-anticipated decision regarding class actions and arbitration, the U.S. Supreme Court held on April 27, 2011, that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts state contract law limitations on the enforceability of arbitration agreements.
In May 2010, the Supreme Court directed the Second Circuit to reconsider its decision in In re American Express Litigation regarding the unenforceability of a class action waiver in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Stolt-Nielsen, S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 130 S. Ct. 1758 (2010).
On November 9, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the much-anticipated oral argument in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion.
On May 24, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, No. 09-893, to address the question of whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts state law rules limiting the enforceability of arbitration agreements.