Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Volume32013verdictgreensheetsiLisaPerrochetTheGreenSheetsalthoughpublishedlaterthanmostcurrentadvancesheetsbecauseofcopydeadlinesshouldserveasausefulreviewofrecentimportantdecisions.ReadersareinvitedtosuggestsignicantdecisionsforinclusioninthenextGreenSheetsedition.PleasecontactLPerrochethorvitzlevy.comTomaketheGreenSheetsausefultooltodefensecounseltheyareprintedingreenandinsertedinthemiddleofVerdictmagazineeachissue.eycanbeeasilyremovedandledforfurtherreference.OfcoursetheGreenSheetsarealwaysoneattorneysinterpretationofthecaseandeachattorneyshouldthoroughlyreadthecasesbeforecitingthemorrelyingonthisdigest.Carefulcounselwillalsochecksubsequenthistorybeforeciting.greensheetsNOTESONRECENTDECISIONScontinuedonpageiiARBITRATIONArbitrationagreementwaivingassertionofclaimsinaclassactionisnotunconscionableevenwherethecostofprovingaclaimonanindividualbasismakesituneconomicaltolitigatetheclaim.AmericanExpressCo.v.ItalianColorsRestaurant2013133S.Ct.2304.InATTMobilityLLCv.Concepcion2011131S.Ct.1740theU.S.SupremeCourtheldthataCaliforniastatelawpolicydeclaringclassarbitrationwaiverstobeunconscionableandunenforceablewaspreemptedbytheFederalArbitrationActFAA.IntheAmericanExpresscasetheU.S.SupremeCourtaddressedtherelatedquestionoftheextenttowhichcourtscouldrefusetoenforceanarbitrationagreementbasedonaconcernthattheagreementfailedtovindicatefederalstatutoryrights.eCourtsaidnodecisivelylimitingthescopeoftheso-calledvindicationprincipleasadefenseagainsteortstoenforcearbitrationagreementsaswritten.ecourtheldthattotheextentitexistsatalltheprincipleprecludesatmostprospectivewaiversoftherighttopursuefederalstatutoryremediesandperhapsalsoprohibitslingandadministrativefeesthataresohightheymakeaccesstothearbitralforumimpracticableincasesinvolvingfederalstatutoryrights.eCourtconcludedthatthisprincipleisnotviolatedbyaclassactionwaiverrequiringindividualarbitrationevenwherethecostofprovingaclaimmakesituneconomicalforapartytolitigateonanindividualbasis.SeealsoOxfordHealthPlansLLCv.Sutter2013133S.Ct.2064arbitratorsdecisionisvalidwherethepartiesagreedthearbitratorcoulddeterminewhetherthearbitrationagreementpermittedclassarbitrationifpartiesbargainforthearbitratorsconstructionoftheiragreementtheFAApermitsfederalcourtstovacateanarbitraldecisiononlywhenthearbitratorstrayedfromhisdelegatedtaskofinterpretingacontractnotwhenheperformedthattaskpoorlysee2013Verdictvol.1Greensheetsavailableathttpwww.ASCDC.orgPublications.aspformoredetailsaboutthesupersededCourtofAppealsdecisioninthiscase.SeealsoFergusonv.CorinthianCollegesInc.9thCir.2013733F.3d928CaliforniaSupremeCourtprecedentBroughtonandCruzcasesprohibitingarbitrationofclaimsforpublicinjunctivereliefbroughtundertheUnfairCompetitionLawortheConsumersLegalRemediesActispreemptedbytheFAAaerConcepcionthevindicationprincipledoesnotsavethisstaterulefromFAApreemptionbecausetheprincipleisinapplicabletostatestatutoryclaims.SeealsoRichardsv.ErnstYoungLLP9thCir.2013734F.3d871indicatingthatfederallaborlawdidnotoverrideFAAsmandaterequiringenforcementofarbitrationagreementsaccordingtotheirtermsincludingtheirclassactionwaiversVoume32013erictgreenseetsierrocetTheGreenSheetsalthoughpublishedlaterthanmostcurrentadvancesheetsbecauseofcopydeadlinesshouldserveasausefulreviewofrecentimportantdecisions.ReadersareinvitedtosuggestsignicantdecisionsforinclusioninthenextGreenSheetsedition.PleasecontactLPerrochethorvitzlevy.comTomaketheGreenSheetsausefultooltodefensecounseltheyareprintedinreenandinsertedinthemiddleofVerdicmaazineeachissue.eycanbeeasilyremovedandledforfurtherreference.OfcoursetheGreenSheetsarealwaysoneattorneysinterpretationofthecaseandeachattorneyshouldthoroughlyreadthecasesbeforecitingthemorrelyingonthisdigest.Carefulcounselwillalsochecksubsequenthistorybeforecitin.rnNTENREENTDEIINcontnueonpageARBITRATINArbitrationareementwaivinassertionofmnnnnnnevenwherethecostofrovinaclaimonannvmnnmtatetecam.AmericanExpressCo.v.ItalianColorsRestaurant2013133S.Ct.2304.InATTMobilityLLCv.Concepcion2011131S.Ct.1740theU.S.SupremeCourtheldthataCaliforniastatelawpolicydeclaringclassarbitrationwaiverstobeunconscionableandunenforceablewaspreemptedbytheFederalArbitrationActFAA.IntheAmericanExpresscasetheU.S.SupremeCourtaddressedtherelatedquestionoftheextenttowhichcourtscouldrefusetoenforceanarbitrationagreementbasedonaconcernthattheagreementfailedtovindicatefederalstatutoryrights.eCourtsaidnodecisivelylimitingthescopeoftheso-calledvindicationprincipleasadefenseagainsteortstoenforcearbitrationagreementsaswritten.ecourtheldthattotheextentitexistsatalltheprincipleprecludesatmostprospectivewaiversoftherighttopursuefederalstatutoryremediesandperhapsalsoprohibitslingandadministrativefeesthataresohightheymakeaccesstothearbitralforumimpracticableincasesinvolvingfederalstatutoryrights.eCourtconcludedthatthisprincipleisnotviolatedbyaclassactionwaiverrequiringindividualarbitrationevenwherethecostofprovingaclaimmakesituneconomicalforapartytolitigateonanindividualbasis.SeealsoOxfordHealthPlansLLCv.Sutte2013133S.Ct.064arbitratorsdecisionisvalidwherethepartiesareedthearbitratorcoulddeterminewhetherthearbitrationareementpermittedclassarbitrationifpartiesbarainforthearbitratorsconstructionoftheirareementtheFAApermitsfederalcourtstovacateanarbitraldecisiononlywhenthearbitratorstrayedfromhisdelegatedtaskofinterpretingacontractnotwhenheperformedthattaskpoorlysee2013Verdictvol.1Greensheetsavailableathttpwww.ASCDC.orgPublications.aspformoredetailsaboutthesupersededCourtofAppealsdecisioninthiscase.Seelsoergusonv.CorinthianCollegesInc.9thCir.201333F.3d928CaliforniaSupremeCourtprecedentBroughtonandCruzcasesprohibitingarbitrationofclaimsforpublicinjunctivereliefbroughtundertheUnfairCompetitionLawortheConsumersLegalRemediesActispreemptedbytheFAAaerConcepcionthevindicationprincipledoesnotsavethisstaterulefromFAApreemptionbecausetheprincipleisinapplicabletostatestatutoryclaims.SeelsoRichardsv.ErnstYoungLL9thCir.2013734F.3d871indicatingthatfederallaborlawdidnotoverrideFAAsmandaterequiringenforcementofarbitrationagreementsaccordingtotheirtermsincludingtheirclassactionwaivers