After Class: Aggregate Litigation in the Wake of AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion

Myriam E. Gilles

Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Gary B. Friedman

Friedman Law Group

September 15, 2011

University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 79, 2012
Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 345

Class actions are on the ropes. Courts in recent years have ramped up the standards governing the certification of damages classes and created new standing requirements for consumer class actions. Most recently, in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the Supreme Court articulated a new and highly restrictive interpretation of the commonality requirement of Rule 23(a). But all of this pales in comparison to the Court’s April 2011 decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, broadly validating arbitration provisions containing class action waivers. The precise reach of AT&T warrants close scrutiny. Our analysis suggests that following AT&T, some plaintiffs will be able to successfully challenge class waivers under certain circumstances. Also, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau - if it is not still-born at the hands of hostile congressional midwives - is likely to eliminate some class action waivers in the financial services field. But most class cases will not survive the impending tsunami of class action waivers. And as this great mass of consumer protection, antitrust, employment and other cases is swept out to sea, the question arises: what or who can fill the resulting enforcement gap?

And here, we believe the “private attorney general” role assumed by class action lawyers over the past several decades will inevitably give way to a world in which state attorneys general make unprecedented use of their parents repatriate authority. Insulated from the threats posed by class action waivers and restrictive class action standing doctrine, AGs are now uniquely positioned to represent the interests of their citizens in the very consumer, antitrust, wage-and-hour and other cases that have long provided the staple of private class action practice. And to tackle complex cases, underfunded AG offices will make use of the private class action lawyers who have acquired expertise in originating, investigating and prosecuting class cases. Of course, there are political risks here - given the model’s dependency on contingent fee arrangements - but there are also substantial political benefits, as AGs around the country begin to take leadership positions in the sort of complex, big-ticket cases that are likely to contribute meaningfully to state coffers - and redress the injuries of consumers and employees who would otherwise have no recourse in a post-AT&T world.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 54

Keywords: class actions, class action waivers, arbitration, unconscionability, parens patriae

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: September 17, 2011 ; Last revised: September 22, 2011

Suggested Citation

Gilles, Myriam E. and Friedman, Gary B., After Class: Aggregate Litigation in the Wake of AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion (September 15, 2011). University of Chicago Law Review, Vol. 79, 2012; Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 345. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1928071

Contact Information

Myriam Gilles (Contact Author)
Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law ( email )
55 Fifth Ave.
New York, NY 10003
United States
212-790-0344 (Phone)
212-790-0205 (Fax)

Gary B. Friedman
Friedman Law Group ( email )
270 Lafayette Street
Suite 1410
New York, NY
United States
212-680-5150 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 4,164
Downloads: 731
Download Rank: 25,647