Skip to main content
Law

Return to Answer

replaced http://law.stackexchange.com/ with https://law.stackexchange.com/
Source Link
Community Bot
Community Bot
  • 1

We have an answer on stare decisis and precedentstare decisis and precedent.

After the Supreme Court decides a case, if a lower court rules on a case with the same fact pattern as the previously decided Supreme Court case, they are bound to come to the same outcome.

They can arrive at a different outcome only if they find aspects of the new case that materially distinguish it from the Supreme Court case.

Regarding the specific case you mention, my reading of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion 563 U.S. ___ (2011) is that it holds that consumer contracts can include clauses that prohibit class-wide-arbitration.

We have an answer on stare decisis and precedent.

After the Supreme Court decides a case, if a lower court rules on a case with the same fact pattern as the previously decided Supreme Court case, they are bound to come to the same outcome.

They can arrive at a different outcome only if they find aspects of the new case that materially distinguish it from the Supreme Court case.

Regarding the specific case you mention, my reading of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion 563 U.S. ___ (2011) is that it holds that consumer contracts can include clauses that prohibit class-wide-arbitration.

We have an answer on stare decisis and precedent.

After the Supreme Court decides a case, if a lower court rules on a case with the same fact pattern as the previously decided Supreme Court case, they are bound to come to the same outcome.

They can arrive at a different outcome only if they find aspects of the new case that materially distinguish it from the Supreme Court case.

Regarding the specific case you mention, my reading of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion 563 U.S. ___ (2011) is that it holds that consumer contracts can include clauses that prohibit class-wide-arbitration.

added 268 characters in body
Source Link
K-C
K-C
  • 4.1k
  • 13
  • 22

We have an answer on stare decisis and precedent.

After the Supreme Court decides a case, if a lower court rules on a case with the same fact pattern as the previously decided Supreme Court case, they are bound to come to the same outcome.

They can arrive at a different outcome only if they find aspects of the new case that materially distinguish it from the Supreme Court case.

Regarding the specific case you mention, my reading of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion 563 U.S. ___ (2011) is that it holds that consumer contracts can include clauses that prohibit class-wide-arbitration.

We have an answer on stare decisis and precedent.

After the Supreme Court decides a case, if a lower court rules on a case with the same fact pattern as the previously decided Supreme Court case, they are bound to come to the same outcome.

They can arrive at a different outcome only if they find aspects of the new case that materially distinguish it from the Supreme Court case.

We have an answer on stare decisis and precedent.

After the Supreme Court decides a case, if a lower court rules on a case with the same fact pattern as the previously decided Supreme Court case, they are bound to come to the same outcome.

They can arrive at a different outcome only if they find aspects of the new case that materially distinguish it from the Supreme Court case.

Regarding the specific case you mention, my reading of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion 563 U.S. ___ (2011) is that it holds that consumer contracts can include clauses that prohibit class-wide-arbitration.

Source Link
K-C
K-C
  • 4.1k
  • 13
  • 22

We have an answer on stare decisis and precedent.

After the Supreme Court decides a case, if a lower court rules on a case with the same fact pattern as the previously decided Supreme Court case, they are bound to come to the same outcome.

They can arrive at a different outcome only if they find aspects of the new case that materially distinguish it from the Supreme Court case.