2 Years Too Long to Wait to Seek Arbitration, US Judge Rules in Certifying Class Against Collector
"A court may refuse to enforce an arbitration agreement when the party seeking arbitration waives its right to arbitration," U.S. District Judge Esther Salas said. "GC's 24-month delay is even longer than the delays in cases where the Third Circuit found waiver."
October 01, 2018 at 03:45 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge has granted class certification in an action against a debt collection company over its business practices, and denied the company's request to arbitrate the issue because that request came two years into the litigation.
U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, sitting in Newark, granted class status to what her ruling said currently amounts to 1,876 members in New Jersey alone, and said the defendant, GC Services Limited Partnership, has not demonstrated that arbitration was the preferred forum for settling the disputes.
The lead plaintiff, Rukhsana Kausar, is a New Jersey resident. GC Services is based in Houston.
The dispute began in February 2015, when Kausar bought something from Brooks Brothers using a store card issued by Synchrony Bank, according to the decision, which does not specify what she purchased, nor the amount she paid.
Synchrony Bank then assigned the matter for collection to GC Services, which in turn sent a letter to Kausar saying it was attempting to collect a debt.
Kausar in her suit alleged that GC Services violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by failing to verify the debt, and that Kausar was not provided information about the identity of the creditor.
Discovery in the lawsuit, which had not yet been designated as a class action, proceeded.
GC Services then moved to have the case settled through arbitration.
Salas noted that while Kausar filed her complaint in August 2015, GC Services waited more than two years to file a motion demanding arbitration. GC Services had argued that the bank, in its contract with it cardholders, provided that all disputes were to be settled through arbitration.
While acknowledging that arbitration is the preferred method for settling disputes as a matter of policy, Salas said GC Services effectively waived its right to arbitration by waiting so long.
“A court may refuse to enforce an arbitration agreement when the party seeking arbitration waives its right to arbitration,” Salas said.
“GC's 24-month delay is even longer than the delays in cases where the [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit] found waiver,” Salas said.
If GC Services had told the court earlier that there was an arbitration clause in the Brooks Brothers credit card agreement, Salas said, she could have stayed the proceedings early in the discovery stage, and Kausar wouldn't have suffered prejudice.
“Instead, GC chose silence,” Salas said.
GC Services also challenged the motion for class certification, but to no avail.
Salas found that the potential class members all lived in New Jersey and received collection letters from GC Services within a certain time period.
“The court agrees that 'a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating this controversy,” Salas said.
Neither the plaintiffs' attorney, Ryan Gentile of the law office of Gus Farinella in Florham Park, New York, nor GC Services' lawyer, Jeffrey Spiegel of the New York office of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, could be reached for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllChiesa Shahinian Bolsters Corporate Practice With 5 From Newark Boutique
5 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Brach Eichler; Cooper Levenson; Marshall Dennehey; Archer; Sills Cummis
7 minute readConstruction Worker Hit by Falling Concrete Settles Claims for $2.3M
4 minute readEagle Pharma Founder Sues Company to Recoup Cost of SEC Investigation
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Jury Says $118M: Netlist Wins Another Patent Verdict Against Samsung
- 2Big Law Media Law Attorneys Brace For Changes Under Trump and Carr’s FCC
- 3Will England Accept that Digital Assets Are ‘Property’?
- 4Congress and Courts Are Considering Litigation Financing: Is Disclosure Imminent?
- 5Bar Report — Nov. 25, 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250