Articles Posted in Procedural Issues

On October 10, 2016 Moll Labooks-484754_1920w Group announced the 5 finalists for the Moll Law Group College Scholarship Award. Out of all the submissions from across the nation, 5 finalists were selected as having the best essays

on the topic of injury prevention. Due to the difficult decision of picking only one winner out of such great essays, Moll Law Group requested the help from the community in selecting the winner of the $1,000 award. People from across the nation were invited to vote for their favorite injury prevention essay and with their help the winner was determined. Due to the proximity of the voting count, 2 runner-ups were also selected to receive an award. The following are the recipients of the Fall 2016 Moll Law Group College Scholarship Award:

$1,000 – Winner – Kassidy O’Brien

Ecrivains_consult_-_Texte_4_mainsIn the recent case of DirectTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, the Supreme Court issued a key decision interpreting the scope of arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs sought to enforce a class action arbitration waiver, which included a provision providing that the entire clause was not enforceable if the law in the signing party’s state dictated that class action waivers are not enforceable. When the defendants executed the contract, California law stated that class action waivers were not enforceable. The lower court ultimately ruled that the class action arbitration waiver was unconscionable and refused to enforce it.

In reaching this holding, the California courts relied on the language in the contract that said “the law of your state,” finding that this allowed the court a basis for avoiding preemption pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act. The lower court determined that Sections 1751 and 1781 of the California Remedies Act required the provision to be deemed invalid, notwithstanding the application of the Federal Arbitration Act.

Continue reading

Big_Day_Out_(8392285402)Earlier this year, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s dismissal of a proposed class action based on the plaintiffs’ failure to meet a number of the four required elements of class certification.

In Karhu v. Vital Pharm, Inc., the defendant manufactured and marketed a dietary supplement intended to help users lose weight. The defendant marketed the product for this purpose. The plaintiffs’ class action lawsuit alleged that the product did not in fact aid with weight loss as the defendant claimed. The plaintiffs sought to certify a class of product users nationwide.

Continue reading