Court Watch

'In Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter ___ U.S. ___, 2013 WL 2459522 (June 10, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court attempted 'to clarify its decision in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. Animal Feeds Int'l Corp., 559 U.S. 662 (2010), which held that arbitrators may employ class procedures only if the parties authorized them to do so. The arbitration provision in Oxford Health Plans did not specifically allow or disallow an arbitrator to consider class clams. It simply contained an 'all disputes' clause, found in many standard arbitration agreements, worded as follows: 'No civil action concerning any dispute arising under this Agreement shall be instituted before any court, and all such disputes shall be submitted to final and binding arbitration in New Jersey, pursuant to the rules of the American Arbitration Association with one arbitrator.'

On its face, that provision does not appear to authorize class claims. A court's decision, following Stolt-Nielsen, to refuse to order the class action into arbitration might appear correct. Both Justices Alioto and Thomas, in a concurring opinion, agreed that if they were acting on a clean slate, they would have held that the arbitrator was not authorized to determine class issues. However, the parties complicated matters in Oxford Health by stipulating that the arbitrator could decide class issues. Had they not done so, the case may have come out differently.