A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of August 20-26.
CFPB Estimates 1,200 More Class Actions A Year Under Anti-Arbitration Rule
Daniel Fisher | Forbes
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has put a price tag on the deterrent effect it says it will unleash by banning class-action waivers in consumer financial contracts: At least 1,200 additional class actions a year, costing more than $100 million a year in legal fees.
CFPB Arbitration Rule Will Enrich Tiral Lawyers, Not Protect Consumers
David Hirschmann and Lisa A. Rickard | Opinion Piece in the The Hill
Today, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau closes the comment period on its proposed rule to enrich trial lawyers at the expense of consumers. The Bureau misleadingly styles its proposal as one to regulate arbitration agreements. The truth is that the proposal is very intentionally designed for the singular goal of promoting class action lawsuits—the number one policy priority of the trial bar. The Bureau’s next step will be to finalize the misguided rule and extinguish consumers’ ability to resolve simple financial services disputes outside the broken class action system.
Five States Most Hostile To Arbitration
Liz Kramer ArbitrationNation
I am celebrating five years of blogging by publishing one “listicle” per day this week. Yesterday, the topic was the five biggest surprises in arbitration law. Today, it is the five states where I would not want to argue in favor of arbitration — either compelling arbitration or confirming an award. In other words, these are the five states I view as most hostile to the case law that SCOTUS has developed under the Federal Arbitration Act.
Employer Alert: Your Arbitration Clause Is Going To Be Tested At SCOTUS
Alison Frankel | Reuters
Something dramatic has happened in the world of employment law this summer, and sooner than later, it’s going to require the attention of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Incredulous Judge Tosses Lawsuit Accusing Starbucks of Putting Too Much Ice in Cold Drinks
Jacob Gershman | Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog
A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit accusing Starbucks of misleading customers about the ice-to-product ratio of its cold beverages. Ridiculing the plaintiffs and their lawyers who brought the case, the judge said no reasonable adult customer — much less a child — could be deceived by the company’s beverage labeling.
Hot Coffee Karma: The Day Was Bound To Happen
Nick Farr | Abnormal Use
I have written about the hot coffee litigation for years. So much so that I suspected that one day I, too, would face my own hot coffee incident. After all, there is only so many times one can say, “Coffee is meant to be served hot and producers shouldn’t be held liable for serving it that way,” before the fates intervened. Karma works that way. As I anticipated, that day finally came.
Follow @NJCivilJustice on Twitter for even more news.
Leave A Comment