A report by the Los Angeles Times discusses the ramifications of the case, AT&T Mobility vs. Concepcion, which is set to go before the Supreme Court next week. The crux of the case is whether companies can bar class action suits in the fine print of their take-it-or-leave-it contracts with customers and employees.  If the court sides with AT&T, this will have sweeping consequences for businesses and consumers, since it would mean that any business that issues a contract to customers would be able to prevent them from joining class-action lawsuits, thus taking away one of the most effective legal tools available to plaintiffs (especially in cases where the compensation is relatively small). Should this happen, many argue that it would make it easier for businesses to engage in deceptive practices, since they would be much less afraid that consumers would actually pursue legal action if class-action is not an option. Furthermore, the ability to ban class actions would potentially also apply to employment agreements such as union contracts.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the class-action ban that AT&T had in its wireless service contracts violates state law and is not preempted by the federal law. AT&T subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case, where the results could potentially be different.  William B. Gould IV, a professor at Stanford Law School pointed out that this Supreme Court, which has a generally pro-business outlook, has already “indicated a measure of hostility toward class actions."

For the full article, click here

 to learn more about contract law, watch Anatomy of a Contract by  Jeffrey Helewitz and Hon. Eileen Nadelson