Law Commons^™

What's Coming For Class Actions,, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

A trio of cases before the Supreme Court in its current term has the potential to dramatically impact the ability of plaintiffs to bring class actions. By taking up Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo, Spokeo v. Robins, and Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez, the Court could be signaling that a shift against class actions is underway which could have significant consequences for plaintiffs seeking class certification.

Recently, in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, Comcast v. Behrend, and AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the Court handed down decisions that increased the burden on plaintiffs' attorneys to show issues and damages common to all plaintiffs in the proposed …

Spokeo, Inc. V. Robins: The Illusory “No-Injury Class” Reaches The Supreme Court, Patricia W. Moore

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins and three other cases involving class actions in the October 2015 term could be a bad sign for those who think the class action should remain a viable species of private regulation. The grant of certiorari in Spokeo is also a bad sign for those who think Congress should be able to enact statutes regulating businesses’ behavior for the public good—the petitioner, Spokeo, and its army of business amici are urging the Court to cut the legs out from under many such statutes.

Corporate litigation activists such as the …

Unconscionable Judicial Disdain For Unsophisticated Consumers And Employees' Contractual Rights? Legal And Empirical Analyses Of Courts' Mandatory Arbitration Rulings And The Systematic Erosion Of Procedural And Substantive Unconscionability Defenses Under The Federal Arbitration Act 1800-2015, Willy E. Rice

Faculty Articles

Although the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) has taken steps to educate consumers about the perils of hidden and complicated arbitration provisions in contracts, these activities are not enough. Exceedingly large populations of unsophisticated employees need assistance because they are increasingly forced to arbitrate state and federal claims. Consequently, the Court's extremely harsh “federal policies” have gradually, systematically, and significantly eroded consumers and employees' ability to defend themselves in compulsive-arbitration trials.

While arbitration may be within the reasonable expectations of consumers, a process that builds prohibitively expensive fees into the arbitration process is not. It is substantively unconscionable to require …

The Amplified Need For Supreme Court Guidance On Student Speech Rights In The Digital Age, William Calve

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.