Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 AUGUST 2019

Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela: Do Ambiguous Arbitration Agreements Provide "Consent" Necessary for Class Arbitration?

Butler Snow LLP
Butler Snow LLP
Contributor
Butler Snow LLP

Butler Snow LLP

Some law firms promise client service. Butler Snow delivers on that promise. Surveys by respected...

View firm profile
Explore more from Butler Snow LLP

The Ninth Circuit held the arbitration agreement was ambiguous as to whether the parties agreed to class arbitration.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
H. Rowan Leathers, III
H. Rowan Leathers, III
Author LinkedIn connections

In Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela,[i] a 5-4 decision issued on April 24, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States concluded "Courts may not infer from an ambiguous agreement that parties have consented to arbitrate on a classwide basis." Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh joined. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan filed dissenting opinions.

Frank Varela, an employee of Lamps Plus, like most other employees at the company, signed an arbitration agreement at the inception of his employment. In 2016, a hacker impersonating a company official tricked a Lamps Plus employee into disclosing the tax information of approximately 1,300 employees. Shortly thereafter, a fraudulent federal income tax return was filed in Varela's name.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from