<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Michael J. Evans:  Law + Technology + Marketing &#187; class action</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mjevans.com/tag/class-action/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mjevans.com</link>
	<description>How lawyers can use the Internet, social media, online video, and technology to attract clients, be more effective, make more money, and have more fun.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 04:54:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Supreme Court rules no class actions allowed in arbitration unless the contract expressly authorizes them (updated)</title>
		<link>http://www.mjevans.com/consumer-protection/us-supreme-court-rules-no-class-actions-allowed-in-arbitration-unless-the-contract-expressly-authorizes-them</link>
		<comments>http://www.mjevans.com/consumer-protection/us-supreme-court-rules-no-class-actions-allowed-in-arbitration-unless-the-contract-expressly-authorizes-them#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:55:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael J. Evans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arbitration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mjevans.com/?p=807</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[April 27, 2010  -  In a 5-3 ruling that dealt another blow to consumer rights, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled arbitration panels may not allow arbitration on a class-wide basis unless the arbitration agreement expressly authorizes it.  Although the parties in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp. were businesses, not consumers, the effects of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mjevans.com/consumer-protection/us-supreme-court-rules-no-class-actions-allowed-in-arbitration-unless-the-contract-expressly-authorizes-them/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

