Arbitration -- 2020



Comcast Corp. v. Tillage; AT&T Mobility LLC v. McArdle   (U.S. Supreme Court)

Arbitration of California public injunction claims

The NAM filed an amicus brief in support of AT&T and Comcast's petition for certiorari to reverse two 9th Circuit rulings in related cases that would eviscerate arbitration agreements in California. The cases implicate the question of whether consumer arbitration agreements in California are enforceable if they waive a plaintiff’s right to seek a “public injunction” against the defendant company. California’s consumer protection laws generally allow a consumer to seek a public injunction that compels the defendant company to take public action to remedy the alleged consumer protection violation. In this case, for example, the plaintiffs sought public injunctions compelling AT&T and Comcast, respectively, to change their disclosures regarding certain fees. Successful public injunction claims can force companies to undertake major and disruptive changes to their business, products or services. The 9th Circuit affirmed lower court rulings invalidating the arbitration agreements because they contained a public injunction waiver. After filing in the Ninth Circuit, NAM filed an amicus brief in support of review that argues that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California law and that requiring arbitration of public injunction claims frustrates and undermines the purpose and benefits of individualized arbitration. On June 1, 2020, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.


Related Documents:
NAM brief  (March 30, 2020)