Supreme Court Kills Class Action Lawsuits Against Corporations

Not sure if the consumer is greatly affected. While I like that companies fear the sting of consumer retribution for knowingly negligent acts they commit, I doubt I've ever seen more than 30 bucks from a class action settlement while the law firm handling the case get on the upwards of 60% of the settlement/judgement.

Roberts Court still sucks.

 

The big loser in this is the lawyers.

 

It is less about the money you get and more about changing how companies do business. If they are punished with monetary loss then they will serve as an example going forward.

 

Can't wait til the court flips.

This is getting embarassing.

 

Wouldn't the invisible hand of free market strike the evil doing companies into submission through their voting dollars?

 

Yes it would but only after people are hurt. for example a faulty toaster than burns down your house would surely hurt the companies profits in the long term but there is no reason to let that play out.

 

What happens to your theory when you realize that it is easy and sometimes cheaper to buy mobile service without a contract?

 

Fen-Phen was pulled from the market by the FDA in 1997. Lawsuits came later.

You have confused this issue with collective bargaining. That town had the same choices of everyone else, chose one provider, then made a deal with them to gain larger buying power. It has nothing to do with this topic.

 

If you allow arbitration agreements, then I think it would probably be making stuff up for the SC to say they can't supercede class-action suits. Where's the basis in law? I think it's unjust (I think the whole arbitration trend is unjust), but the solution isn't to have the Supreme Court flying by the seat of its pants. The appropriate venue would be legislation around what rules arbitration must abide by. But, I'm not optimistic that'll happen either.

 

The basis in law for a federal court determining what is and isn't in its jurisidiction? Or whether or not an arbitration agreement is unconcsionable in a common law sense?

Neither of these things is even remotely in question.

 

I'm not familiar with their particular argument before the court. What is the justification to allow an arbitration agreement to forbid a lawsuit but not a class-action suit? Was their some failing in the wording of the Federal Arbitration Act?

 

The title of this thread is misleading as the Supreme Court isn't killing class action lawsuits against corporations just for consumers who have agreed to arbitration. A toaster maker who sells a faulty toaster that is shocking people could still be sued in a class action as long as the consumers didn't agree to a contract with arbitration.

 

This is the correct answers. Class action lawsuits stopped being a tool for the consumer a long time ago. The primary winner in a class action lawsuit is the class counsel. The secondary winner is the defense counsel. The tertiary winner is some times the defendant. While the company spends a lot of money defending the case, it quites often wins through the settlement, which is just a coupon to the consumers. The consumers then use the coupon to buy more product from the company.

Additionally, corporations have used class actions to dispose of large numbers of cases in a way that save the company money. I believe there have been allegations of collusion between companies and the class counsel to create and quickly settle cases in the past.

 

Striving for contentment as usual.

Let me know in advance when you can get cell service from a major telephone carrier that won't make you sign an arbitration agreement.

Try buying a car or an applicance etc.

Do you actually think you will be able to buy a lot of things besides maybe groceries or certain common items that won't make you sign arbitration agreements?

 

I'm shocked.

Make no mistake, this is an affirmation of the nickel-and-dime theft that seems to be the model for corporations today. Think of the frustration you have when trying to get a bill fixed now and compound it to infinity. This removes pretty much any incentive the company has to make things right. They can wait you out and you are screwed. Go to a competitor you say? What competition is there if they all play the same game? Hey, cable/phone/internet/satellite/credit card/mortgage company and all other regularly charged services... add those fees, make those mistakes that are always in your favor, arrange it so that bills have a good chance of being late, and then stonewall and obfuscate as a matter of policy. It's all good. Our Supreme Court has just given you license to be creative in screwing consumers and now there is even less that we can do about it.

 

This has already happened to me twice on credit cards. They changed the due date without letting me know and because of late payments upped my APR. Of course I caught it right away both times and threatened to cancel the cards if they persisted. They backed down but now? who knows?