Home  ›  News  ›

Supreme Court Says AT&T Can Avoid Class Action Suits

Article Comments  

This forum is closed.

This forum is closed.

planethulk

Apr 27, 2011, 11:31 AM

Is there really any question as to what reality is?

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power". -Mussolini
That statement you just quoted is an excellent description of the Obama administration....nationalizing the banks, nationalizing the automobile industry, and it is clear that the goal of the FCC is nationalization of the telecommunications industry......
(continues)
...
Slammer

Apr 27, 2011, 2:52 PM

Another Nail In Consumer Power.

This a major loss for consumer advocacy.

It is very tough, if at all possible, to overturn a Supreme Court ruling. This will ruling will be forever written. Think about that.

In an industry that is not consumer friendly, this essentially allows carriers to "Make mistakes" easier and being held accountable harder. Imagine the millions of reimbursed customer dollars carriers could have kept in the past if not for class action suits. The carriers would have gotten away with murder. Now add in the fact that ATT wants to acquire TMO eliminating more competition. This narrows the gap between ground and six feet under. All power will be forfeited into the hands of carriers. Consumers will be fighting Wireless City Hall.

For all th...
(continues)
Arbitration has been in the contract for years. If you don't like it, don't use the service.
...
imapolymorph

Apr 27, 2011, 9:16 PM

The lawyers will almost surely appeal this.

The lawyer associations and bar associations across the US will almost surely appeal this for their precious toy has been taken from them.
There's no place to appeal to. The best they could do is wait for a more liberal court and go through the whole process again.
T Bone

Apr 27, 2011, 5:52 PM

God Forbid someone be required to uphold a contract!

How outrageous that a court would agree that when one voluntarily signs a legally binding contract that the contract he signed is actually legally binding!

Not since I learned that the Pope is Catholic have I been more surprised or offended!
T Bone said:
How outrageous that a court would agree that when one voluntarily signs a legally binding contract that the contract he signed is actually legally binding!


Outrageous? Sometimes, yes. That a covenan...
(continues)
...
Fredd

Apr 27, 2011, 11:37 AM

Class Action Suits

Are a racket to help attorneys rake in huge profits, while the individual users gets pennies.
At least they could get pennies, now they can't even afford to buy lubricant before AT&T gets hold of them...
...
No, they really aren't. You're just being ignorant.
imapolymorph

Apr 27, 2011, 9:11 PM

I guess people will have to read their contracts now , & if i see "binding arbitration" I say **** U

🙂
Ishamael

Apr 27, 2011, 11:03 AM

I'm confused...

Is this regarding a particular suit, or is the supreme court just granting ATT immunity to class-action lawsuits and letting the other carriers swim on their own?
A little of both. What it really means is that AT&T can enforce its terms of service, which require individual arbitration.

This ruling applies specifically to AT&T, but other carriers will likely cite this decision if similar claims are levied ag...
(continues)
 
 
Page  1  of 1

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.