Citibank Arbitration Clause
Are you arbitration-ed out?
Waiting with bated breath for the Supremes to rule in Concepion already?
Well we have two significant arbitration updates to report on this evening.
First, Judge King invalidated Citibank's standard no-class action/arbitration clause in its credit card agreements, finding the clause to be substantively unconscionable under South Dakota law.
The opinion, which could potentially have wide application, has been Scribified above.
Second, my friends at Aventura law firm Stok Folk + Kon have scored big, with the Supremes taking cert in an arbitration clause waiver case also involving Citibank.
You can read the 11th Circuit's opinion here, which I humbly believe was wrongly decided.
Come on, the bank filed an answer(!), did not raise arbitration therein, and allowed the firm to serve an offer of judgment, reply to the answer, and discovery before suddenly realizing they have an applicable arbitration clause argument?
It's also picayune for the 11th to focus on the lack of record evidence of the time and money spent litigating in state court before the arbitration clause was invoked. The mere existence of the offer of judgment, reply to the answer and discovery requests should be sufficient to establish these facts for purposes of evaluating the prejudice to the law firm of Citibank sandbagging them a month later with the arbitration clause.
Seriously, should they have done a notice of filing of their time runs to prove this point?
(Whether or not these actions constitute sufficient prejudice is a different issue, and whether prejudice should be required at all after a waiver is presumably what the Court will be looking at).
Now, the last time a Florida native went all the way up to DC to argue a big-time case before the Supremes, there was a little issue with names.
Let's get it right this time, fellas!
Use the largest online attorney directory to quickly find detailed profiles of Florida lawyers and law firms in your area.
Đăng ký:
Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)
Bài đăng phổ biến
-
Sheesh, does anyone have any news of any interest? Does it count that I saw Ervin rockin' some hard-core aviators outside the courthous...
-
That old W.C. Fields line is ringing in my head, as the wind kicks up and rip tides batter the coast. I have to be honest, with the emerging...
-
Federal Rule Violation If you have been charged with USCA0024 FEDERAL RULE VIOLATION you can call a Defense Attorney Tampa at 1-877-793-9290...
-
Here's an interesting opinion from Magistrate Judge Torres awarding defendants attorney's fees for opposing a copyright infringemen...
-
11th Circuit, 11th Schmircuit, that's what I always say. And I see I'm not alone. On Friday in the closely-watched Checking Overdraf...
-
The Second District Court, in Pierce v. Pierce, affirmed a finding of contempt and rejected an argument that the lower tribunal should have...
-
The Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled today in Tullier v. Tullier , affirming the lower court’s modification of timesharing for the Form...
-
Our friend Glenn continues to pretend he's a lawyer, except now he's a top-notch US Attorney taking pot shots at the prosecutorial...
-
Hi folks, lots of fun stories floating around today. First, as anyone working at a big firm knows, conflicts checks are a real hassle. Just ...
-
The Second District Court of Appeal ruled yesterday in Zambuto v. Zambuto , reversing the lower court’s ruling on two grounds. The District...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét