CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood

Case Date: 10/11/2011
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: none

Facts of the Case 

CompuCredit marketed a subprime credit card under the brand name Aspire Visa to consumers with low or weak credit scores through massive direct-mail solicitations and the Internet. CompuCredit marketed the card and the cards were issued by Columbus Bank and Trust. Wanda Greenwood and other consumers filed suit against Compucredit and Columbus alleging violations of California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The lawsuit claimed that the CompuCredit and Columbus' promotional materials were deceptive because they mentioned the credit card fees in small print, buried in other information and not in proximity to the representation that no deposit was required.

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied the credit providers' motion to compel arbitration. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed. The majority explained that a party must adhere to an agreement to arbitrate claims "unless Congress itself has evinced an intention to preclude a waiver of judicial remedies for the statutory rights at issue." Accordingly, the "burden is on the party opposing arbitration to show that Congress intended to preclude a waiver of judicial remedies."

Question 

Are claims arising under the Credit Repair Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1679 et seq., subject to arbitration pursuant to a valid arbitration agreement?

Argument CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood - Oral ArgumentFull Transcript Text  Download MP3