« Imposing class arbitration on parties who have not agreed to it violates Federal Arbitration Act (5-3) | Main | SCOTUS: Arbitrator, not court, decides whether arbitration agreement is unconscionable (5-4) »
AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion: Cert granted
May 24, 2010 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo
The US Supreme Court today granted certiorari in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, which will test whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts state unconscionability law.
Plaintiffs brought a class action claim that a telephone company’s offer of a “free” phone to anyone who signs up for its service is fraudulent to the extent the phone company charges the new subscriber sales tax on the retail value of each “free” phone. The phone company demanded the plaintiffs’ claims be submitted to individual arbitration, pointing to the arbitration clause of the written agreement, which arbitration clause requires arbitration, but bars class actions.
The 9th Circuit held that (1) the phone company's class action waiver clause is unconscionable under California law, and (2) The Federal Arbitration Act does not preempt California unconscionability law.
Case below: Laster v. AT&T Mobility LLC (9th Cir 10/27/2009)
Official docket sheet
Certiorari granted May 24, 2010.
Oral argument: To be scheduled, probably Fall 2010.
Question presented:
Whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts States from conditioning the enforcement of an arbitration agreement on the availability of particular procedures - here, class-wide arbitration - when those procedures are not necessary to ensure that the parties to the arbitration agreement are able to vindicate their claims.
Certiorari Documents:
- Petition for a writ of certiorari
- Brief of respondents Vincent Concepcion, and Liza Concepcion in opposition
- Reply of petitioner AT&T Mobility LLC
- Supplemental brief of respondents
- Brief amici curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation, et al.
- Brief amicus curiae of Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America
- Brief amicus curiae of CTIA - The Wireless Association
- Brief amicus curiae of DRI - Voice of the Defense Bar
Counsel:
- For Petitioner: Kenneth S. Geller; Mayer Brown LLP; 1909 K Street, N.W.; Washington, DC 20006; kgeller@mayerbrown.com; (202) 263-3000.
- For Respondents: Deepak Gupta;Public Citizen Litigation Group; 1600 20th Street, NW; Washington, DC 20009; dgupta@citizen.org; (202)-588-1000.
EEOC | NLRB | Supreme Court | Employment Law Blog | Arbitration Blog | Employment Law 101
