Alternative Dispute Resolution
Nov. 10, 2015
Battles expose core problems with arbitration system
Recent cases filed against San Francisco-based 23andMe provide a glimpse at the litigation tar pits arbitration clauses can create. By Jeremy Robinson
Jeremy K. Robinson
Partner Casey, Gerry, Schenk, Francavilla, Blatt & Penfield LLP
110 Laurel St
San Diego , California 92101-1486
Phone: (619) 238-1811
Fax: (619) 544-9232
Email: jrobinson@cglaw.com
Jeremy is chair of the firm's Motion and Appellate Practice.
Mandatory arbitration clauses are a hot topic these days. Following the U.S. Supreme Court's 2011 decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, which effectively allowed companies to wipe out class actions with one inconspicuous paragraph, companies have stampeded to cram mandatory arbitration clauses in every conceivable transaction. Let us not forget General Mills' ill-fated attempt to foist arbitration on unsuspecting cons...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In