Texans for Lawsuit Reform

Through political action, legal, academic and market research, and grassroots initiatives, TLR fights for common-sense reforms that keep Texas open for business.

  • About TLR
    • Our Mission
    • Our Team
    • Timeline of Reforms
  • Videos
  • Issues
  • Resource Center
    • Special Reports
    • In the News
    • Press Releases
    • The Advocate
    • TLR Blog: For the Record
  • Get Involved
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
    • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Donate
  • Stay Informed
In the News

Forcing more litigation isn’t the answer to litigation abuse

Washington Examiner, July 30, 2019

By Phil Goldberg

To avoid the expense and stress of going to court, Americans are turning to arbitration to settle workplace, and other, disputes. Free enterprise depends on businesses, employees, and consumers to be able to resolve disputes quickly and fairly. Plaintiffs’ lawyers, who file lawsuits for a living, are trying to convince Congress to take that option away.

The House recently held a hearing to ban pre-dispute arbitration agreements in employment, consumer, and anti-trust matters. Their supporters are attaching anti-arbitration clauses to various bills, including the National Defense Authorization Act this month, and want action on a comprehensive ban (the “FAIR Act”) before recess. They also are trying to leverage the #MeToo movement, which is critical to the success of women in the workplace, to suggest that courts are the only places for protecting people’s rights.

The real-life experience has been the opposite. People and businesses have found value in arbitration because it often allows them to reach quicker, less combative, and fairer resolutions. In 2011, the Supreme Court held that people could agree to arbitrate any dispute that arises so long as both parties to the agreement have a fair and reasonable process. The American Arbitration Association and the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services have rules and procedures, including over how arbiters are chosen, to ensure such fair treatment.

Arbitration is geared toward resolution. Rules are less formal, discovery is tailored to the dispute, and plaintiffs receive individual attention. It is not all-or-nothing warfare, which is important when relationships matter, as in the employment context. Also, businesses often pay costs of the arbitration and attorneys’ fees to facilitate the claims.

Indeed, studies show that arbitration is beneficial. The U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform released a study by NDP Analytics comparing employment arbitration to lawsuits over a five-year period. The report found employees are three times more likely to win in arbitration than in court and, on average, receive higher awards. Also, a government study has found that consumer arbitrations are generally resolved in seven months, compared to three years in litigation.

The public relations machine supporting the poorly named FAIR Act is now in full gear. Terri Gerstein of Harvard University and Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute attackedNDP’s study, but missed their target. Their main beef was that the study looked at arbitrations regardless of whether the agreement to arbitrate came before or after the issue arose and did not look at class actions. When the arbitration agreement occurred has nothing to do with the whether the result was fair. Their other concerns are similarly off-point.

San Francisco School of Law Professor Joshua Davis advocated for the FAIR Act by espousing benefits of antitrust class actions. Antitrust actions, though, epitomize the problem with high-stakes litigation: They often are not about compensating aggrieved individuals, but maximizing attorneys’ fees. Plaintiffs’ lawyers often try to leverage the costs of litigation to generate settlements and attorney’s fees regardless of the merits.

The Supreme Court identified this concern with antitrust cases, cautioning that “the threat of discovery expense will push cost-conscious defendants to settle even anemic cases.” J. Thomas Rosch, a former Federal Trade Commissioner, further explained that, “The plaintiffs’ lawyers … stand to win almost regardless of the merits of the case.” Arbitration helps weed out these abuses and focuses on real people and real disputes.

Finally, Zachary Clopton and David Noll, law professors at Cornell and Rutgers, call for more “creativity” in opening the floodgates to needless litigation. They propose that states sue companies when employees or consumers have arbitration clauses, and if states do not want to do so, allow people unconnected to the dispute to file the lawsuits. Such cases would be completely abstracted from reality, since nobody would be representing anyone alleging an actual injury.

It is not surprising that plaintiffs’ lawyers are fighting arbitration with the zeal of the self-interested. But it’s also their fault people are turning away from the courts in favor of private dispute resolution. Litigation has become much too expensive and lawyer-driven. Congress should not get in the way if people contract to avoid the expense and abuse of litigation. Now is not the time to ban this useful alternative, but to enhance it.

Phil Goldberg is director of the Progressive Policy Institute’s Center for Civil Justice and the Managing Partner of the Washington, D.C., Office of Shook Hardy & Bacon, LLP. In May 2019, he testified in the House of Representatives in favor of pre-dispute arbitration agreements.

Follow us on Facebook

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

3 days ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

In case you missed it: Specialized business courts like the Delaware Court of Chancery can be an important addition to a state’s economic foundation. These courts quickly and expertly handle complex business litigation, freeing up other courts to handle other types of cases. Read and share: bit.ly/3y7zwnI ... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Making Business Our Business

bit.ly

Much has been written about Elon Musk—eccentric billionaire, CEO of some of the most innovative companies in the world and… future owner of Twitter? While the nuances of this deal are daily fodder...
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 0
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

4 days ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

The federal judge who supervises multidistrict opioid litigation had ordered a certain percentage of future opioid settlements to be set aside for plaintiffs’ lawyers who have similar cases outside the MDL, diverting more settlement money away from the victims. Read & share: bit.ly/3NqcDQP ... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Multidistrict Opioid Litigation Continues to Enrich Plantiffs' Lawyers

bit.ly

Multidistrict opioid litigation is once again being used to the advantage of plaintiffs’ lawyers. This very serious issue requires a victims-first approach, not a plaintiffs’-lawyer-payday-first a...
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 1
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

5 days ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

A month passed before Harris County courts brought in 18-year-old Corey Hodges, who violated his bond conditions 37 times. Crime Stoppers’ Andy Kahan blames the initial judge's lack of enforcement on his first bond violation back in 2015. Read and share: bit.ly/3A6vLjC ... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

18-year-old charged with murder, aggravated assault violates bond conditions at least 37 times

bit.ly

HARRIS COUNTY, Texas – 18-year-old Corey Hodge could be a poster guy for Breaking Bond. “This is clearly you are breaking your bond conditions,” said Andy Kahan with Crime Stoppers. On April 17,...
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 1
  • Shares: 1
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter

lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
1 Jul 1542991625462464513

TLR is working to make the Texas legal system fair, efficient, and accessible for all. Learn more: #tortreform #stoplawsuitabuse

About - Texans for Lawsuit Reform

TLR's objective is to restore litigation to its traditional and appropriate role in our society. A lawsuit takes a heavy emotional and financial toll ...

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1542991625462464513Retweet on Twitter 1542991625462464513Like on Twitter 1542991625462464513Twitter 1542991625462464513
lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
1 Jul 1542901497490456578

#ICYMI: Certain business courts like the Delaware Court of Chancery can be an important addition to a state’s economic foundation. These courts quickly & expertly handle complex business litigation freeing up other courts to handle other cases. Read & RT:

Making Business Our Business

Much has been written about Elon Musk—eccentric billionaire, CEO of some of the most innovative companies in the world and… future owner of Twitte...

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1542901497490456578Retweet on Twitter 15429014974904565781Like on Twitter 1542901497490456578Twitter 1542901497490456578
lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
30 Jun 1542629262443905024

Fighting lawsuit abuse keeps our courts fair and our economy strong. Learn more →

About - Texans for Lawsuit Reform

TLR's objective is to restore litigation to its traditional and appropriate role in our society. A lawsuit takes a heavy emotional and financial toll ...

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1542629262443905024Retweet on Twitter 1542629262443905024Like on Twitter 1542629262443905024Twitter 1542629262443905024

Texans for Lawsuit Reform
1701 Brun Street
Houston, Texas 77019

Ph. 713-963-9363
  • About TLR
  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Timeline of Reforms
  • Videos
  • Issues
  • Resource Center
  • For the Record
  • Special Reports
  • In the News
  • Press Releases
  • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Get Involved
  • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Donate
  • Stay Informed
  • Contact TLR

Copyright © 2022 · Texans for Lawsuit Reform. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2022 · Texans for Lawsuit Reform.
All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy