Quantcast
 

arbitration Tag

Trump Administration Moves to Block Nursing Home Residents’ Access to the Courts

The Trump administration, which has also reduced the use of penalties against nursing homes that mistreat residents, characterizes arbitration agreements as advantageous to both facilities and patients because it allows for quicker resolution of disputes without the expensive costs of litigation. In actuality, though, the administration is placing the interests of giant corporations above some of the country’s most vulnerable citizens.

Fighting Trump’s Secrecy Agreements: Because Justice for Alva is Justice for All

Public Justice has partnered with our friends at the law firms of Tycko & Zavareei LLP and Varnell & Warwick to take on Trump’s secrecy agreements and help Alva Johnson – a Trump campaign employee who helped organize some of the President’s most significant campaign events – find justice for her and other campaign workers.

Public Justice Statement on Supreme Court Decision to Review ‘New Prime, Inc. v. Oliveira’

Today, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the First Circuit’s decision in ‘New Prime, Inc. v. Oliveira.’ We welcome the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case both because we are hopeful the Court will see that the First Circuit correctly decided the case, but also because we believe the truck drivers who work for New Prime have been denied crucial rights under the wage and hour laws.

Public Justice Statement on CFPB Director Richard Cordray

Earlier today, Richard Cordray, Director of the CFPB, announced he will be stepping down from the agency at the end of the month. Public Justice’s executive director, Paul Bland, issued the following statement in response to Cordray’s announcement:

Challenging a Federal Court Decision Shutting the Courthouse Door on Consumers, Because Privacy Invasion Supposedly Wasn’t an “Injury”

In a case called Romero v. Department Stores National Bank, for example, a consumer received literally hundreds of robocalls from the banks that issue Macy’s-branded credit cards, despite the fact that she repeatedly told them to stop calling her. The consumer sued the banks for violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act—a statute that prohibits unwanted robocalls to cell phones. But the trial court held that the consumer lacked standing to bring her lawsuit.