What Is The Lesson Of Oxford Health Plans v. Sutter?


The Supreme Court today decided Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter. This decision expands the scope of class actions in arbitration. In Oxford Health, the court took back what the court gave in Stolt-Nielsen, where the court had ruled that an arbitrator may not order a class arbitration when the parties’ contract is silent on the point. Here, the contract seemed to be silent, but was broadly written. Too broadly written, as it turned out.

The language authorizing a “civil action” in arbitration allowed the arbitrator to rule that the parties intended for class arbitration to be maintained because a class action is a “civil action.” As long as there is some basis for that decision, as there was here, the Supreme Court will not overturn it.

The lesson continues to be for companies to include clear prohibitions of class arbitrations in their contracts. Otherwise, as the court noted in its decision, the “potential for those mistakes is the price of agreeing to arbitration.”


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.

© Carlton Fields | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Carlton Fields 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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.