Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Randolph

NCLC argues that nothing in the language or legislative history of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) precludes arbitration of claims filed pursuant to that statute. Because arbitration agreements contemplate that they will be conducted in individual proceedings, NCLC urges the Court to reject the argument asserted by the plaintiffs that TILA’s class action provisions override the pro-arbitration policy of the Federal Arbitration Act.

On remand from the U. S. Supreme Court, the Eleventh Circuit — agreeing with NCLC — held that the class action provisions of the Truth-in-Lending Act (TILA) do not prevent courts from enforcing agreements to arbitrate TILA claims nor do they require TILA claims to be arbitrated on a class-wide basis.
 

Amicus brief filed 2/19/01. Decision 3/13/01.