Tag: AT&T

Two senators introduce bill to allow suits v. cell companies

October 14, 2011 by

Two senators introduced a bill on October 4, to prohibit wireless companies from having clauses in contracts that prohibit consumers from suing the companies because of hidden fees or other contract disputes. Senators Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Al Franken of Minnesota introduced the measure, which would ban the common practice of putting clauses in

AT&T: Motion to Move Wage & Hour Class Action to Florida denied

October 3, 2011 by

On September 12, 2011, a federal judge denied AT&T’s motion to move an at-home call center wage and hour class action lawsuit from California to Florida.  Perry v. AT&T, Case No. C11-01488 is currently pending in the Northern District of California. The class action complaint against AT&T Mobility and Arise Virtual Solutions was filed on

A comment on AT&T v. Concepcion

September 30, 2011 by

Cliff Palefsky of McGuinn, Hillsman & Palefsky disputes the assertion that sending a case to arbitration has no impact on substantive rights; that faulty premise, he contends, underlies much of the Court’s arbitration jurisprudence.   This article appears on Scotusblog. The Supreme Court has told us repeatedly that judges do not create public policy. Public policy,

Justice Scalia ignores text of Federal Arbitration Act

May 11, 2011 by

I recently posted the results of the Supreme Court opinion in AT&T v. Concepcion – the invalidation of a state law that rendered unenforceable the waiver of class action suits in arbitration.  However, upon closer review of the opinion, the method utilized by the Supreme Court majority of five Republican nominated Justices is very troubling. 

AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion: By No Means the End

May 6, 2011 by

On April 27, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. __ (2011), in which the Court held that § 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempts a certain California judicial rule (the so-called Discover Bank rule) relating to collective-action waivers in arbitration agreements.  Justice

AT&T Blue Sky Project overtime pay class action settled

April 21, 2011 by

A class action settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit against AT&T in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (entitled Buccellato v. AT&T Operations, Inc., Case No. C10-00463-LHK).  The lawsuit alleged that AT&T misclassified the Class Members as exempt from the overtime pay requirements of federal and state

Oral argument heard in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion

November 19, 2010 by

The US Supreme Court heard oral argument in the AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion case on November 10, 2010.  As we explained earlier on this blog, the class action complaint alleged that AT&T misleadingly offered a “free” phone to consumers, then charged consumers sales tax for “free” phones.  AT&T demanded individual arbitration, relying on a provision

NELA files amicus brief in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion

November 5, 2010 by

The National Employment Lawyers Association (“NELA”) filed an amicus brief in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, which is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.  That case presents the important question of whether states retain authority to apply general principles of contract interpretation to class action waivers found in arbitration agreements. The NELA brief says that the use of such

NCLC files amicus brief in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion

November 3, 2010 by

The National Consumer Law Center (“NCLC”) filed an amicus brief in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, which is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.  As mentioned earlier in this blog, the Concepcion case involves the issue of whether states retain authority to apply general principles of contract interpretation to class action waivers found in arbitration agreements.

Page 1 of 2