|
A federal district court in Pennsylvania granted a motion to compel arbitration, rejecting plaintiff’s challenge to the prohibition on class-wide proceedings.
In Venezie v. MBNA America Bank, No. 2:05CV1458, 2006 WL 2092567 (W.D. Penn. July 26, 2006), Venezie brought a putative class action against MBNA, alleging that MBNA violated the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) by changing the terms of his cardholder agreement without notice.
MBNA moved to compel arbitration pursuant to an amendment to the cardholder agreement. In amending the agreement and adding an arbitration provision, MBNA mailed notice to its cardholders and gave them an opportunity to opt out of arbitration.
In opposing the motion, Venezie argued the he never agreed to arbitration. The Court rejected this argument because MBNA amended the agreement in accordance with Delaware law by providing Venezie with notice and an opportunity to opt out.
Venezie also objected to the arbitration agreement’s prohibition on class-wide proceedings. Dismissing this objection, the Court cited several circuit court decisions for the principle that “the inability to pursue class relief does not irreparably impair the plaintiff's right to recourse under TILA.”
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|