Arbitration
A critical piece of the Litigation Center’s work continues to be protecting the enforceability of pre-dispute arbitration agreements, including those that waive the availability of class actions.
The Litigation Center has been deeply involved in every significant arbitration case decided by the Supreme Court in the last decade, where the Court has reiterated time and again that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) compels state and federal courts to enforce arbitration agreements on the same terms as other contracts.
Despite these important victories, some lower courts remain hostile to arbitration. The Litigation Center has forcefully opposed various efforts to discriminate against arbitration, to reimpose class arbitration, to shrink the FAA’s protections by stretching the statute’s exemption for transportation workers engaged in interstate commerce, or⸺as with interpretation of California’s Private Attorneys General Act⸺simply to refuse proper enforcement of arbitration agreements.
Latest Content
Missouri Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseMissouri Supreme Court holds that filing a pre-answer motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim does not waive the right to arbitrate, which is an affirmative defense. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief supporting this result.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Missouri Supreme Court to hold that filing a motion to dismiss does not automatically waive the right to seek arbitration.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit: Decided
View CaseSecond Circuit holds app customers validly agreed to arbitrate, but not antitrust claims lacking nexus to app use. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief urging the Second Circuit to uphold apps’ contract-formation process and reject state-law nexus requirement as preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Second Circuit to enforce the terms of online service contracts, including terms submitting all disputes to arbitration, between food-delivery applications and consumers.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Decided
View CaseNinth Circuit upholds arbitral forum’s consolidation of mass-arbitration claims, criticizing mass-arbitration tactics designed to coerce defendants to settle. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief supporting this result.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Ninth Circuit to uphold arbitral forum’s consolidation of mass arbitration claims.Georgia Court of Appeals: Decided
View CaseGeorgia Court of Appeals holds that filing of named plaintiff’s complaint tolls the time for all putative class members to opt out of arbitration agreement, despite agreement’s language specifically providing that customers cannot opt out by filing a lawsuit. The court dismissed some claims arising after an amendment to Georgia’s usury law. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief urging the court to dismiss those claims and enforce the arbitration agreement.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Georgia Court of Appeals to enforce arbitration agreement providing that customers cannot opt out of arbitration by filing a lawsuit.California Supreme Court: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging California Supreme Court to hold that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California SB 707, which disfavors arbitration agreements by imposing punitive sanctions on their drafters for failing to pay arbitration fees within 30 days, for any reason.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: Decided
View CaseFourth Circuit holds that Servicemembers Civil Relief Act does not include explicit language needed to displace the Federal Arbitration Act’s protections. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief supporting this result.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Fourth Circuit to hold that only clear and explicit statutory language can displace the Federal Arbitration Act’s protections.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Ninth Circuit to uphold reasonable bellwether arbitration procedures designed to address the threat of extortionate mass arbitrations.New York Court of Appeals: Decided
View CaseNew York Court of Appeals holds that online “clickwrap” agreement process provides adequate notice of arbitration clause in electronic terms and conditions. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief supporting this outcome.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging New York Court of Appeals to enforce arbitration clause in online terms plaintiff accepted by clicking separate checkbox and button confirming review and consent.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit: Decided
View CaseTenth Circuit holds that wholly intrastate “last-mile” delivery driver is part of a class of interstate transportation workers exempt from the protections of the Federal Arbitration Act. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief arguing that his wholly intrastate activities could not qualify for the transportation worker exemption.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Tenth Circuit to hold that Federal Arbitration Act’s transportation-worker exception only covers classes of workers for whom a central part of their job directly involves transporting goods across state or international borders.Pennsylvania Supreme Court: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Pennsylvania Supreme Court to hold that orders compelling arbitration are not immediately appealable and to reject heightened consent requirement for arbitration agreements. The Chamber previously filed three briefs in this case.Pennsylvania Supreme Court grants review to decide whether orders compelling arbitration are immediately appealable and whether online arbitration agreements must be enforced according to generally applicable contract rules. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief urging the court to grant review.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Decided
View CaseNinth Circuit holds that defendant’s bellwether arbitration procedures are substantively unconscionable and unprotected by the Federal Arbitration Act. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief urging the court to uphold reasonable bellwether arbitration procedures designed to address the threat of extortionate mass arbitrations.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Ninth Circuit to uphold reasonable bellwether arbitration procedures designed to address the threat of extortionate mass arbitrations.U.S. Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseSupreme Court declines to review whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California’s anti-arbitration McGill rule, which purports to invalidate arbitration agreements waiving the right to seek injunctive relief on behalf of the general public. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief supporting a grant of certiorari.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Supreme Court to grant cert and hold that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts California’s McGill rule, which purports to invalidate arbitration agreements that waive the right to seek injunctive relief on behalf of the general public.U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: Decided
View CaseD.C. Circuit holds that federal courts have jurisdiction to enforce international investor-state arbitration award despite dispute over foreign sovereign’s capacity to agree to such arbitration by treaty. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief supporting this outcome.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging D.C. Circuit to affirm that federal courts have jurisdiction to enforce international investor-state arbitration award despite foreign sovereign’s claim that it lacked capacity to agree to such arbitration by treaty.California Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseCalifornia Supreme Court clarifies that courts may sever unconscionable terms in arbitration agreements when an illegal provision is collateral to the contract’s main purpose, it is possible to cure the illegality by means of severance, and enforcing the rest of the contract would be in the interests of justice. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief supporting this result.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging California Supreme Court to hold that California law favors severability of unconscionable provisions in contracts and arbitration contracts are no exception.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit: Decided
View CaseSeventh Circuit reverses order compelling mass arbitration and payment of arbitration fees because claimants failed to meet their initial burden of proving the existence of a valid arbitration agreement and the alleged agreement delegates resolution of threshold arbitration-fee disputes to the arbitrator. The U.S. Chamber filed a coalition amicus brief supporting this result.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Seventh Circuit to hold that mass-arbitration claimants must prove that they each have an arbitration agreement with the defendant.U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Fourth Circuit to hold that unilateral change-in-terms provision does not render arbitration agreement illusory and unenforceable.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: Decided
View CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court holds that "clickwrap" agreement requiring all disputes between Uber and its passengers to be resolved by arbitration is enforceable. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief in support of this outcome.Case transferred to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.U.S. Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseSupreme Court holds that a court, rather than an arbitrator, must decide whether a later contract modifies the scope of a delegation clause in a prior contract’s arbitration agreement. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief urging the Court to enforce the parties’ delegation clause because the plaintiffs had not raised a specific enough challenge to its scope.U.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging Supreme Court to hold that delegation clause requires arbitrator to decide whether a subsequent contract modifies the scope of original arbitration agreement.U.S. Supreme Court: Decided
View CaseSupreme Court unanimously holds that Section 3 of the FAA requires district courts to stay a lawsuit pending arbitration, and that district courts do not have discretion to dismiss the suit. The U.S. Chamber filed an amicus brief in support of this outcome.U.S. Chamber files amicus brief urging Supreme Court to hold that the Federal Arbitration Act requires a stay pending arbitration when requested by one of the parties.California Supreme Court: Pending
View CaseU.S. Chamber files coalition amicus brief urging California Supreme Court to hold that auto manufacturer may enforce arbitration agreement in dealership’s sale contract.