AT&T MOBILITY LLC v. CONCEPCION ET UX - Essay Example

The Ninth Court held a 5-4 decision that was written by Justice Scalia. The majority held that the provision was unconscionable under the provisions of California law as held by the Discover Bank. Laster v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 584 F. 3d 849, 855. This paper will analyze this case by explaining the issues involved, the majority opinion and also provide a stand on whether the minority dissent was better than the majority opinion. In the AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion et ux. case, the Supreme Court in U.

S ruled against the use of a state judicial doctrine that made the enforceability of an arbitration agreement limited. This decision dealt a blow to consumers but proved a success to corporations and merchants. The Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) obstructs the application of a judicial doctrine (Discover Bank rule) used in California that gives courts the permission to hold unconscionable class action arbitration waivers in agreements with consumers concerned. The above doctrine applies in cases where the class proceedings involve an adhesion consumer contract, when disputes attract small amounts of damage and that the superior party in the contract has deliberately conned many consumers’ large sums of money.

The Supreme Court ruled that the FAA obstructs the California rule, thereby eliminating strong basis for protecting consumers (Sergeant, 2012). This paper will discuss the AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion et ux. case and the ethical issues in it. Vince and Liza Concepcion made a cell phone agreement contract with Cingular Wireless in February 2002. This contract had an arbitration clause that mandated all claims to be brought in the individual capacity of the party as opposed to a plaintiff or class member in ant representative proceeding or purported class.

The agreement gave the service provider permission to make unilateral amendments willingly. AT&T Mobility LLC took over Cingular in 2005 with all its consumer