Supreme Court To Clarify Key Issues Regarding The Permissibility Of Class Arbitration

by Orrick - Global Employment Law Group
Contact

[authors: ]

In the last several years, the enforcement of agreements to arbitrate disputes, whether between businesses or between businesses and their employees, has become a hotly contested issue in the courts. The U.S. Supreme Court issued two significant pronouncements in this area in the past few years. In 2010, in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. Animalfeeds International Corp., 130 S.Ct. 1758 (2010), the Court held that where an agreement to arbitrate is silent on the question of whether a plaintiff can arbitrate her claims on behalf of a proposed class of similarly situated individuals (similar to a class action lawsuit), class arbitration is not permissible. Last year, in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011), the Court held that (1) under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), arbitration agreements are to be enforced “according to their terms”; and (2) state law rules prohibiting the use of “class-action waiver” provisions, in which a party waives his or her right to arbitrate claims on a class basis, are preempted by the FAA. Together, these cases stand for the fundamental proposition that the parties to arbitration agreements should be bound by the clear terms of such agreements, especially with respect to class arbitration issues.

The Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in two cases that should further clarify the law in this area. In In Re American Express Merchants’ Litigation, No. 12-133, (petition granted Nov. 9, 2012), the Court will address the question of whether a plaintiff who has signed an arbitration agreement containing a valid class-action waiver provision can avoid the enforcement of the provision where she demonstrates, through competent evidence, that it would be “economically irrational” to arbitrate her claims on an individual basis. The decision that will go before the Supreme Courtissued by the Second Circuit Court of Appealsholds that a plaintiff may avoid having to arbitrate her claims on an individual basis where she makes such a showing. This appears to flatly contradict the Supreme Court’s recent pronouncements in the Stolt-Nielsen and Concepcion cases. It also conflicts with Coneff v. AT&T Corp., 673 F. 3d 1155 (9th Cir. 2012), in which the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals expressly disagreed with the Second Circuit on this issue.

In Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, No. 12-135 (petition granted Dec. 7, 2012), the Court is poised to resolve a circuit split regarding the proper interpretation of Stolt-Nielsen in the context of generally worded arbitration agreements that do not expressly reference class arbitration. On one hand, the Second and Third Circuits have held that arbitrators have virtually unlimited discretion to impose class arbitration proceedings as long as they find at least an implicit agreement to arbitrate on a class basiseven if the contractual language at issue states nothing more than that the parties agree to resolve all disputes through arbitration. In Jock v. Sterling Jewelers, Inc., 646 F. 3d 114, 117 (2d Cir. 2011), a divided Second Circuit panel upheld an arbitrator’s determination that an arbitration contract implicitly authorized class arbitration notwithstanding the absence of any reference to class claims in the contract. And in Sutter v. Oxford Health Plans LLC, 675 F. 3d 215, 224 (3d Cir. 2012)the decision now on appeal to the Supreme Courtthe Third Circuit upheld an arbitrator’s decision to order class arbitration despite the lack of any express language authorizing it based on a finding that the arbitrator’s determination in this regard was not “totally irrational”. On the other hand, the Fifth Circuit has held that (1) under Stolt-Nielsen, courts must meaningfully review the contractual basis underlying an arbitrator’s decision to impose class arbitration; and (2) broadly worded arbitration clauses cannot alone be the basis for class arbitration. See Reed v. Florida Metro. Univ., Inc., 681 F. 3d 630, 642-43, 646 (5th Cir. 2012), reh’g denied, June 15, 2012.

The American Express and Oxford Health Plans cases should provide much-needed clarity in an area of law in which decisions have been all over the map. American Express provides an opportunity for the Supreme Court to reverse a troubling trend within the Second Circuit in which courts invalidate otherwise-valid class action waiver provisions in the face of Concepcion and Stolt-Nielsen, often at the expense of businesses in the financial services industry. Oxford Health Plans provides an opportunity for the Court to reiterate and re-emphasize its directive in Stolt-Nielsenthat class arbitration cannot be imposed unless the parties expressly agree to it. We should expect decisions from the Court in these cases sometime in the summer of 2013.

 

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.

© Orrick - Global Employment Law Group | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Orrick - Global Employment Law Group
Contact
more
less

Orrick - Global Employment Law Group on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!