Originally from Journal of American Arbitration (JAA)

Preview Page

I.  INTRODUCTION 

II.  CLASS ACTION PRECLUSION CLAUSES 

A. Introduction 

B. National Trend—CAPs Are Enforceable 

C. California’s Approach 

III.  CLASS ACTION ARBITRATIONS 

A. Background 

B. California’s Approach 

IV. PENNSYLVANIA’S APPROACH: THE CALIFORNIA APPROACH 

A. Pennsylvania Caselaw 

1.  Stevenson v. Com. Dep’t of Revenue 

2.  Dickler v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. 

3.  Lytle v. Citifinancial Services, Inc. 

4.  Wong v. First Union National Bank 

5. Goldstein DDS v. Doral Dental Service of PA 

B. Short-Falls of Pennsylvania’s Approach 

C. Benefits of Pennsylvania’s Approach 

V.  THE CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT: FEDERAL PRE-EMPTION

           OF STATE  CLASS ACTIONS 

A. Congressional Findings 

B. Purpose 

C. Effects 

D. Status of Class-Action Arbitrations in Pennsylvania

         Post Federal Legislation 

VI.  CONCLUSION