California Supreme Court Allows Arbitration Agreements With Class Waivers


On Monday, June 23, 2014, the California Supreme Court held in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation of Los Angeles, LLC that a state’s refusal to enforce an arbitration agreement that waives the right to class proceedings on public policy or unconscionability grounds is preempted under the Federal Arbitration Act. In its previous decision in Gentry v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that class action waivers may be unenforceable when considering certain factors. That decision led to the regular invalidation of class waivers. However, in the wake of the United States Supreme Court’s holding in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the California high court announced that its decision in Gentry was no longer viable because states cannot require a procedure that interferes with the fundamental attributes of arbitration. The court further held that such waivers are not unlawful under the National Labor Relations Act, but did draw an exception for claims brought under the Private Attorneys General Act.

Topics:  Arbitration, Arbitration Agreements, AT&T Mobility v Concepcion, Class Action, Class Action Arbitration Waivers, Federal Arbitration Act, Iskanian, SCOTUS, Trucking Industry

Published In: Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Updates, Civil Procedure Updates, General Business Updates, Conflict of Laws Updates, Labor & Employment Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Blank Rome LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »