Put this post in the “I called it” category.
On June 12, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court declared in Feeney that class arbitration waivers are invalid under Massachusetts law if plaintiffs cannot effectively pursue their claims in individual arbitration. On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court decided American Express, holding that arbitration agreements must be enforced according to their terms under the Federal Arbitration Act, even if it means that low-dollar claims will not be prosecuted. ...
As we were waiting for SCOTUS’s decision in AmEx, we got a decision on vindicating statutory rights from a different high court: the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. In an opinion that could be a blueprint for other plaintiff-friendly states, the supremes in Massachusetts held that courts may invalidate arbitration agreements that preclude class actions if a plaintiff proves he or she “effectively cannot pursue a claim against the defendant in individual arbitration.” Feeney...
In an appellate mediation over the fate of a mediation program, two sides have agreed to preserve mediation. Back in 2011, Springfield, MA, passed two ordinances to deal with the foreclosure problem in the city. The first instituted a mediation program. The second required lenders to post a $10,000 bond for any foreclosures filed for vacant properties. Lenders filed suit in U.S. District Court, where the judge affirmed Springfield’s right to mandate both the bond and mediation. You can read about...