October Term 2009 · Docket 08-1198
Can parties force class arbitration without explicit consent?
The dispute centers on whether a contract clause allows class arbitration when the text does not explicitly state it.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Waxman stated that arbitrators derive authority solely from party consent.
Ms. Pillard argued that arbitrators interpreted the contract as the parties asked.
Justice Breyer questioned the interpretation of the Bazzle precedent.
Justice Ginsburg identified the preliminary question regarding the arbitration clause.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-41
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case examines the scope of arbitration agreements. It tests if silence on class treatment implies consent to group proceedings.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-17
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 9, 2009.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 19-21
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to reverse the lower court's interpretation of the contract.
the opposing sides want the Court to affirm the lower court's interpretation of the contract.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-17
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue that arbitrators derive authority solely from specific party consent to the agreement.
the opposing sides argue that arbitrators interpreted the contract as the parties requested without imposing policy.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-17
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the preliminary question was whether the clause permitted class treatment.
Justice Breyer questioned whether the Bazzle precedent answered the who question.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-41
Why it matters
This issue determines the default rule for silent arbitration clauses. It affects the rights of parties in commercial disputes. It shapes the scope of private arbitration agreements.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-17
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 39-41
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 27-41 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 27-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-17 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-17
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.