Two years ago, the US Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, holding that state-law may not invalidate an arbitration agreement solely because the agreement prohibits the use of class procedures in arbitration. Concepcion has been cited in hundreds of opinions and has been applied broadly to uphold individualized arbitration of state-law claims. This has led both to the dismissal of numerous class actions and to the increased use of arbitration provisions by businesses. As the use of arbitration has proliferated since Concepcion, both businesses and their consumers and employees are beginning to understand why arbitration on an individual basis is a more-than-worthy substitute for class actions in court, and most often a significant improvement. Join Mayer Brown partners Archis Parasharami, Andrew Pincus, and Evan Tager as they discuss:
- The legal issues relating to enforcement of arbitration provisions that persist after Concepcion
- The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s ongoing study of arbitration and ways in which the Bureau could exercise its authority to regulate the use of arbitration
- Why individual arbitration is better for consumers and employees than class-action litigation
- Pitfalls to avoid in drafting arbitration provision
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
12:30 p.m. – 1:30 p.m. EDT
11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. CDT
10:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. MDT
9:30 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. PDT
CLE credit is pending.
Instructions for accessing the program will be sent prior to the event.
For additional information, please contact Rahini Shankar at email@example.com or +1 202 263 3153.Learn more about Mayer Brown's Consumer Litigation & Class Actions, Banking & Finance Litigation, Corporate & Securities, Supreme Court & Appellate, Employment Litigation and Counseling, Privacy & Security, and Insurance practices.