The Court is likely to continue to evaluate consumers’ right to have their day in court in the coming year. In the decade since the Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011), clauses requiring mandatory pre-dispute arbitration and prohibiting class actions have proliferated. In Concepcion, the Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempted a California law under which class-action bans in arbitration clauses were deemed to violate state public policy and, thus, were unenforceable . Id. at 343. As of 2018, at least half of U.S. households and 25 million employees were subject to mandatory arbitration clauses prohibiting class actions.
You have the power to change the lives of seniors in poverty
1 in 3 older adults struggle to meet their basic needs. Your gift can help seniors secure good jobs, get the benefits they've earned, and stay connected to their communities.
The importance of arbitration clauses in civil litigation, thus, continues undiminished, and two cert petitions pending before the Court provide further opportunities for the Court to clarify the reach of arbitration. Both cases, Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (No. 20-1573), and HRB Tax Group v. Snarr (No. 20-1570), challenge judicial decisions holding that California laws authorizing plaintiffs to proceed in representative capacities are not preempted by the FAA.
AARP Foundation Highlights
Thanks to the support of our donors and partners in 2022, we helped older adults with low income secure more than $726 million in new income, benefits, refunds, and credits.
In Moriana, a plaintiff whose employment contract required her to waive her right to bring a private attorney general action sued her employer under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) for allegedly violating California labor law. Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, Inc., No. B297327, 2020 WL 5584508, at *1 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 18, 2020). Under PAGA, a plaintiff can seek damages against her employer on behalf of herself and other employees if the State declines to intervene in the case. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 8, Moriana (20-1573). Those employees receive a quarter of any monetary recovery, with the remaining three-quarters going to the State. Id. at 9. The California Supreme Court has held that Concepcion does not require arbitration of a PAGA claim because such claims represent a dispute between an employer and the State, whereas the aim of the FAA is to ensure efficient resolution of disputes over a litigant’s private rights. Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348, 384 (Cal. 2014). (The Ninth Circuit has also rejected a challenge to Iskanian, though on the grounds that PAGA actions do not raise the same efficiency concerns as class actions.) The Viking Cruises cert. petition argues that Iskanian is nearly identical to Concepcion, in that both involved the State declining to enforce an arbitration agreement pursuant to an important public interest and asks the Supreme Court to overrule Iskanian. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 2-3, Moriana (20-1573).
The second case, HRB Tax Group v. Snarr, involves a California rule governing “public injunctions,” which are defined as injunctions that have “‘the primary purpose and effect of’ prohibiting unlawful acts that threaten future injury to the general public.’” Snarr v. HRB Tax Group, Inc., 839 Fed.Appx. 53, 54 (9th Cir. 2020) (quoting McGill v. Citibank, N.A., 393 P.3d 85, 90 (Cal. 2017)). California case law makes unenforceable a contract that waives the right to seek public injunctive relief in all forums. Snarr, 389 Fed. Appx. at 54. In Snarr, the plaintiff sought a public injunction against HRB, claiming the tax preparation company misleadingly steered tax filers away from a free service and toward a paid one, in violation of California consumer protection laws. Id. at 55. The plaintiff’s arbitration agreement with HRB forbids public injunctions and so is unenforceable under California law, and the Ninth Circuit refused to compel arbitration of the plaintiff’s claim. Id. at 54
In so doing, the court relied on Blair v. Rent-A-Center, Inc., 928 F.3d 819 (9th Cir. 2019), a prior circuit case holding that the FAA does not preempt the public-injunction rule. Blair rests on the premises that, unlike the ban on class-action waivers at issue in Concepcion, the public-injunction rule does not single out arbitration and does not undermine the purported efficiency and informality of bilateral arbitration, given that a plaintiff can seek a public injunction in a bilateral arbitration without resort to class-certification procedures. Id. at 827-29
