CONTACT ME


  • Kimberly A. Kralowec
    Schubert Jonckheer Kolbe & Kralowec LLP
    Three Embarcadero Center,
    Suite 1650
    San Francisco, CA 94111
    Telephone: (415) 788-4220
    Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
    Email: uclpractitioner@gmail.com

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Disclaimer


  • Nothing in this blog constitutes legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult an attorney in your jurisdiction. To read this blog's complete disclaimer, click here.


  • The UCL Practitioner
    © 2003-2009
    by Kimberly A. Kralowec
    All rights reserved.


  • Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner




  • Header design by Webmotion
    Photos by Jack Gescheidt
    Powered by TypePad

« Rehearing denied and opinion amended in class certification/collateral estoppel case: Johnson v. GlaxoSmithKline | Main | New class action settlement decision: Cundiff v. Verizon California, Inc. »

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Ninth Circuit opinion on no-class-action arbitration clauses: Hoffman v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.

In Hoffman v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., ___ F.3d ___ (9th Cir. Oct. 14, 2008) (per curiam), the Ninth Circuit remanded for the district court to re-determine whether, under California's choice-of-law rules, South Dakota or California law applies in assessing whether the credit card contract's no-class-action arbitration clause is unconscionable. 

That analysis would be outcome-determinative, because the clause would be enforceable under South Dakota law (slip op. at 14492 n.2), but "would be substantively unconscionable under California law on the facts alleged" (id. at 14497) (emphasis in original).

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345172b069e20105358a3f5e970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ninth Circuit opinion on no-class-action arbitration clauses: Hoffman v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.:

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Research


California Law Blogs