It’s not at all evident to me why SCOTUS felt the need to grant review of Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela. But it did. And the majority decision, authored by Chief Justice Roberts, did precisely what I think that everyone who looked at the case expected: it held that courts cannot find the necessary
Class action arbitration continues to be a hot topic among the federal appellate courts this summer.
The 8th Circuit followed the lead of other circuit courts, finding that courts, not arbitrators, presumptively decide whether the parties’ arbitration agreement allows for class arbitration. Catamaran Corporation v. Towncrest Pharmacy, 2017 WL 3197622 (July 28,
Just four months ago, SCOTUS suggested (but did not hold) that the decision to allow class arbitrations might be a “gateway” issue of arbitrability that defaults to courts. This week, the Sixth Circuit was the first to take the bait and declare the availability of class actions a gateway question that a court decides unless
The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Sutter today, unanimously holding that as long as the arbitrator bases a decision to allow or disallow class arbitration on the text of the parties’ agreement, her “construction holds, however good, bad, or ugly.” Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, 569 U.S. ___ (June 10, 2013). The
All the cool kids are talking about class arbitration lately. . . There are the two cases pending before SCOTUS, and now the Second Circuit confirms its place in the “in crowd” with a decision forcing a class of employees into arbitration in Parisi v. Goldman, Sachs & Co., __ F.3d __, 2013 WL
While the oral argument before the United States Supreme Court in Sutter today was ostensibly about whether to affirm an arbitrator’s decision that the parties’ contract authorized class arbitration, the decision really turns on how the Court will review all arbitration decisions. (Transcript here.) Multiple Justices expressed an unwillingness to create a special
The big issue in arbitration law in 2012 was class arbitration. Many state court opinions that had found class arbitration waivers unconscionable were preempted under federal law based on application of Concepcion. And the federal circuit courts developed a split on how to interpret Stolt-Nielsen in cases where the parties’ arbitration agreement lacks language
Just last Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to review a second circuit court case that allowed a class action to proceed, despite arguments that the arbitration clause precluded any collective actions. The granting of these petitions is a fitting way to end a year in which there has been considerable discussion about how to apply
With less colorful language than its last arbitration opinion, the First Circuit sided with the Second and Third Circuits in limiting the application of the 2010 Stolt-Nielsen decision on the availability of class arbitration. Fantastic Sams Franchise Corp. v. FSRO Assoc. Ltd., __ F.3d __, 2012 WL 2402560 (1st Cir. June 27, 2012).
The Fifth Circuit just issued a decision openly disagreeing with how the Second Circuit has interpreted both the Stolt-Nielsen decision and case law regarding the level of deference that courts owe arbitrators. In Reed v. Florida Metropolitan Univ., Inc., __ F.3d __, 2012 WL 1759298 (5th Cir. May 18, 2012), the Fifth Circuit vacated