As Art mentioned yesterday, the Supreme Court, in CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood, 79 U.S.L.W. 3442, 2011 WL 220683 (U.S. May 2, 2011), agreed to decide next term the following Question Presented: “Whether claims arising under the Credit Repair Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1679 et seq., are subject to arbitration pursuant to a valid arbitration agreement.” The Ninth Circuit had decided in the opinion below that Congress intended to preclude arbitration of claims arising under the CROA, a consumer protection statute, when it provided consumers with a “right to sue” violators of the prohibitions in the statute. Because that Ninth Circuit decision conflicted with opinions from the Third and Eleventh Circuits, the Supreme Court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari to resolve the circuit split.

What is notable is that many claims arising under the CROA are pursued in class actions, as they typically are too small for consumers to bring them individually. Since the Court just a few weeks ago effectively eliminated class arbitration of consumer protection claims in AT&T v. Concepcion (see Indisputably coverage here, here, and here), the stakes are quite high for consumers. A decision to reverse the Ninth Circuit holding that CROA claims are arbitrable could eliminate the ability of many consumers to vindicate their CROA statutory rights.