Proposed legislation now working its way through the New Jersey Senate would eliminate the eligibility of postsecondary students and other individuals for State student assistance, training and employment services, including...more
On March 26, the American Bankers Association and the Consumer Bankers Association, represented by Ballard Spahr, filed an amicus brief in support of petitions for certiorari asking the Supreme Court to review the Ninth...more
It now looks as though the Supreme Court is ready to receive, and we think grant, a petition for writ of certiorari in Blair v. Rent-A-Center (and related cases) that could spell doom for California’s McGill rule under which...more
On January 17, 2020, the Ninth Circuit denied the defendants’ petitions for panel and en banc rehearing in the Blair v. Rent a Center appeals, setting the stage for possible U.S. Supreme Court review of the California Supreme...more
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
This arbitration decision may result in a "whack." For more than 30 years, the California Supreme Court has been playing a game of arbitration "Whack-A-Mole" with the U.S. Supreme Court....more
On June 28, 2019, the Ninth Circuit held in three separate cases that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not preempt the California Supreme Court’s holding in McGill v. Citibank, N.A., 2 Cal.5th 945 (2017) — otherwise...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
Earlier this year, we reported on the pendency of several Ninth Circuit appeals concerning the enforceability of consumer arbitration agreements with respect to claims for “public” injunctive relief. On June 28, 2019, in...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
Consistent with the historical reluctance of California courts to enforce arbitration provisions in consumer contracts, on April 6, 2017, the California Supreme Court ruled that an arbitration provision that waived an...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
Over the last decade, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a string of opinions with profound implications for the enforceability of arbitration provisions and class action waivers in consumer contracts. These decisions, the most...more
In 2014, we blogged about a California state appellate court decision invalidating the arbitration clause in DIRECTV’s consumer contracts. We found that California decision to be noteworthy because it seemed to fly in the...more
On December 14, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court applied its landmark Concepcion decision and reversed a California appellate court’s ruling that an arbitration clause containing a class arbitration waiver was unenforceable under...more
The United States Supreme Court recently reversed a decision by the California Court of Appeal wherein the state court refused to enforce a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement. The Supreme Court enforced the class...more
On December 14, 2015, the United States Supreme Court in DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, 577 U.S. ___, No. 14-462, slip op. at 1 (Dec. 14, 2015), doubled down on its previous holdings that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”)...more
In DIRECTV v. Imburgia, the Supreme Court reversed the California Court of Appeal, which held that a contractual class arbitration waiver was unenforceable under California law, even though the arbitration provision at issue...more
In DirecTV v. Imburgia, No. 14-462, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 7999 (December 14, 2015) the United States Supreme Court reversed a California Court of Appeal decision interpreting, and invalidating, an arbitration clause containing a...more
In DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia et al., the Supreme Court bolstered the preemptive power of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), once again overturning a state court’s holding that an arbitration agreement was unenforceable due...more
Legislative Update - Governor Brown recently signed into state law the following employment law bills (among others): SB 358—Referred to as the California Fair Pay Act, this law is directed at closing the pay...more
This is the second post in our series “The Supreme Court Preview,” - California state and federal courts have a rocky history with the U.S. Supreme Court, as the highest court in the land has repeatedly reversed the...more
On October 11—his very last day to sign or veto bills—Governor Brown vetoed the much-feared Assembly Bill 465. AB 465 would have banned mandatory agreements to arbitrate Labor Code claims as a condition of employment. At...more
On October 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced that it is considering two rulemaking proposals that would severely limit the use of pre-dispute arbitration clauses in consumer financial service...more
As we reported in this space late last year, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 131 S.Ct. 1740, 1745 (2011), tilted the scales toward federal power in the field of arbitration, preempting...more