The inclusion in arbitration clauses of a waiver of public injunctive relief has gained popularity generally, but such a waiver is currently unenforceable in California. However, California’s controversial precedent on the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011) caused a shockwave in California’s class action bar when it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempted California’s former...more
Takeaway: Businesses operating in California now face another hurdle in drafting enforceable arbitration agreements. The California Supreme Court has invalidated a provision in an aggressive class action waiver purporting to...more
On April 6, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in McGill v. Citibank, finding that a pre-dispute arbitration agreement was unenforceable to the extent it required the plaintiff to waive her right to seek...more
In a closely-watched case, the California Supreme Court recently held in McGill v. Citibank, N.A. that arbitration clauses that foreclose a plaintiff’s right to pursue public injunctive relief in any forum are invalid and...more
On April 6, 2017, in the matter Sharon McGill v. Citibank, N.A., the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously that an arbitration agreement that waives a statutory right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum, is...more
The California Supreme Court has once again deviated from what many view as clear precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the enforcement of arbitration agreements. Last week, the California court decided McGill v....more
On April 6, 2017, the California Supreme Court, in McGill v. Citibank, N.A., No. S224086, ruled that a provision in Citibank’s arbitration agreement purporting to waive the right to seek “public” injunctive relief under...more
California’s resistance to the longstanding federal policy favoring arbitration frequently results in public expressions of frustration by the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. In over five years since the Supreme Court’s...more
The Ninth Circuit Decision - Delivering a perhaps unexpected blow to employers, the Ninth Circuit sided with the California Supreme Court earlier this week in upholding the state-court-fashioned Iskanian rule, which...more
Tuesday, by a two-to-one vote, the Ninth Circuit joined the California Supreme Court in holding that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims are an exception to the Federal Arbitration Act. In Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail...more
Yesterday, by a two-to-one vote, the Ninth Circuit joined the California Supreme Court in holding that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims are an exception to the Federal Arbitration Act. In Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail...more
In a dispute over the purchase of a car, the purchaser filed a class action in California against the car dealer, and the dealer moved to compel arbitration. The dealer invoked the arbitration agreement contained in the...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court provided additional guidance as to how to draft an enforceable arbitration agreement and how Courts should analyze whether mandatory arbitration provisions can be held unconscionable...more
The California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Company, LLC, on August 3, 2015, reversing a finding by the Court of Appeal that an arbitration provision was unconscionable...more
On August 3, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Sanchez. v. Valencia Holding Company, LLC (2015) — Cal.4th — (Sanchez). The court provided much-needed clarity for consumers and auto finance...more
Four years ago, the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion altered the landscape of class action litigation. Putative class plaintiffs Vincent and Liza Concepcion filed a suit against their...more