In 2012, the plaintiff entered into a cellphone service contract with AT&T Mobility in which she agreed to arbitrate all disputes and claims with AT&T Mobility and its “subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, employees, predecessors in interest, successors, and assigns.” Three years later, AT&T Inc., the parent company of AT&T Mobility, acquired DirecTV, which, unlike AT&T Mobility, provided satellite television service, not cellphone service.
In 2017, the plaintiff sued DirecTV in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia claiming that DirecTV violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by calling her cellphone to advertise DirecTV products and services even though her phone number is listed on the National Do Not Call Registry. Recognizing that the plaintiff had never been a DirecTV customer, DirecTV nonetheless moved to compel arbitration, asserting that the dispute was covered by an arbitration agreement in the contract governing the plaintiff’s cellphone service from AT&T Mobility, a DirecTV “affiliate.”
Read the complete story here.
In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Karl Bayer, an Alternative Dispute Resolution practitioner with almost thirty years of experience in litigation, mediation, and arbitration. A long-time successful...
By Karl Bayer, Amy SchmitzThis article was first published on the Securities Arbitrate Alert, here. In about a month, the Supreme Court has gone from zero arbitration-centric cases set for review to four (five...
By George FriedmanIn this, the first episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Svetlana Gitman, Vice President of the Commercial Division at American Arbitration Association (AAA). Amy and Svetlana talked about how...
By Svetlana Gitman, Amy Schmitz
With the purchase of a Featured Membership, you will be shown on the front page of Arbitrate.com to web site visitors from your city and region (“state” if you are in the USA). You may appear in more than one city/region by purchasing additional locations.
