In Bess v. Direct TV, No. 99-L-55A (8/24/04), the Fifth District reversed a determination by the trial court that an arbitration clause was unenforceable, but remanded so that the trial court could consider plaintiff's other arguments why arbitration should not be compelled.
The decision offers an interesting look at the interplay between the law of arbitration and class actions. In the Bess case, plaintiff filed a putative class action arguing that the defendant's late fee violated consumer laws. The plaintiff's agreement with the defendant included an arbitration clause, which the defendant moved to enforce in the trial court. The motion was denied, but the defendant took an interlocutory appeal.
The Bess court reversed, disagreeing with the trial court that the failure of the arbitration clause to provide for a class action remedy made it unenforceable. In so holding, the Bess court relied on the recent U.S. Supreme Court case on arbitration clauses, Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Bazzle, 539 U.S. 444, 156 L.Ed. 2d 414, 123 S.Ct. 2402 (2003).
[Below the fold: More about arbitration and class actions in Illinois.]
Recent Comments