Class Action Plaintiffs Can’t Have It Both Ways When Opposing Motions To Compel Arbitration

Keywords: Arbitration, AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, Class Certification, Credit Repair Organizations Act, King v. Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., motion to strike class allegations, numerosity, predominance,

In litigation—as in war—it is natural to focus on winning today's skirmish and to defer planning for battles that might not happen for weeks or months.But that shortsightedness can lead to strategic blunders—as one class action plaintiff suing Capital One Bank and credit counseling agency InCharge Debt Solutions recently learned the hard way.

In King v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. (pdf) (W.D. Va.), the plaintiff, who had asked InCharge to help her with a debt-management plan for some debts she owed to Capital One, alleged that (among other things) the two companies had a hidden relationship that violated the Credit Repair Organizations Act. After she filed a class action, the defendants moved to compel arbitration on an individual basis under the