A plaintiff claiming Amazon.com Inc.’s voice-activated Alexa devices recorded her private conversations without authorization will have to arbitrate her “surreptitious recording” claim, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said in an unpublished ruling Friday.
In a fractured decision, the court held that insofar as the lower court decided the surreptitious recording claim wasn’t subject to arbitration because the allegation is “criminal in nature,” the district court was wrong.
Read the complete story, here.
For a detailed discussion of the decision, see here.
Arbitration Conversation Episode 18: Amy interviews the "Blues Lawyer" Aric Garza from San Antonio, Texas about consumer arbitration and how to promote fairness in consumer cases. https://youtu.be/M9d84bWZAecBy Aric J. Garza, Amy Schmitz
This article was first published on Proskauer Blog, here. While the California Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld arbitration agreements with class action waivers (as they must under the Federal Arbitration...By Anthony J. Oncidi, Philippe A. Lebel
This article first appeared on Securities Arbitration Alert, here. In what we are certain is a reaction to a flurry of multiple individual arbitrations that relate to the same event,...By George Friedman