The National Law Journal with DC News from Legal Times

30 Day Free Trial

National News
Washington News
  • Home
  • Legal Business
  • Law Schools
  • Columns
  • Verdicts
  • Opinion
  • Video Center
  • Blog

NLJ Home > News > More fallout from ruling on recess appointments as D.R. Horton challenges decision on class action waivers

Font Size: increase font decrease font

More fallout from ruling on recess appointments as D.R. Horton challenges decision on class action waivers

By Claire Zillman / The Litigation Daily All Articles 

The National Law Journal

January 30, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •       Comments (1)
 
Ogletree Deakins' Ron Chapman Jr.

Ogletree Deakins' Ron Chapman Jr.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit shook up both Washington and Wall Street last Friday, when it invalidated President Obama's January 2012 recess appointments of three members of the National Labor Relations Board. The decision also threatened Obama's appointment of Richard Cordray to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, since Cordray was appointed at the same time as the NLRB members, and it raised serious questions about the CFPB's ability to police the financial industry without a director at its helm.

Now D.R. Horton, a company that's been tangling with the NLRB in a key case dealing with employer arbitration agreements, wants the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to extend the D.C. Circuit's reasoning to another NLRB member who was appointed nearly three years ago. If the Fifth Circuit agrees, it could pose major problems for the NLRB, including undermining the agency's year-old holding in the Horton case that companies can't compel employees to waive their rights to collective action through private arbitration agreements.

On Tuesday Horton counsel Ron Chapman Jr. of Ogletree Deakins filed a letter with the Fifth Circuit, arguing that the appointment of NLRB member Craig Becker, whom Obama named to the five-seat board with a recess appointment on March 27, 2010, was also invalid under the D.C. Circuit's ruling Friday in Noel Canning v. NLRB. In that case, the D.C. Circuit found that the president's three recess appointments on Jan. 4, 2012 were invalid because the Senate was still meeting in "pro forma" sessions at the time, and because the board vacancies didn't arise during an official recess. According to Tuesday's letter, the same situation applied in March 2010, when Becker was named via recess appointment to a stint on the NLRB's board that ran through Jan. 3, 2012.

"Just like the situation in Noel Canning, the vacancy Mr. Becker filled did not arise during the Senate's recess, nor did the president appoint him during that recess," Chapman wrote.

A finding that Becker's appointment was invalid could throw decisions from Becker's 21-month tenure into legal limbo. Specifically, Chapman told us Wednesday, it would affect all NLRB decisions issued when the board had only three members during Becker's term, and any decisions where Becker's vote was necessary for a majority.

Most significantly for D.R. Horton and other employers, such a finding could force the NLRB to scrap its Jan. 3, 2012 ruling curtailing class action waivers in its case against Horton. As we've reported, the NLRB's decision in the Horton case, which the company immediately appealed to the Fifth Circuit, was widely seen as clashing with the U.S. Supreme Court's 2011 ruling in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, which made it easier for defendants to enforce arbitration agreements with would-be class action plaintiffs.

Industry groups and employee advocates have filed a flurry of amicus briefs in Horton's appeal before the Fifth Circuit. Ogletree's Chapman told us in an email Wednesday that the appellate court will consider Tuesday's letter during oral arguments on Feb. 5.

NLRB public affairs director Nancy Cleeland didn't respond to a request for comment.



Subscribe to The National Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

 

Reader Comments

  • ponsoldt

    January 31, 2013 12:03 PM

    by "the u.s. court of appeals for the d.c. circuit" you actually mean a couple of republican ideologue politicians who happen to have been appointed to the federal bench after signfiicant litmus-testing, right? so why don't you say it?

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Post a Comment »
Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • AT&T Mobility
  • Fifth Circuit
  • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
  • National Labor Relations Board
  • U.S. Court of Appeals
  • Supreme Court of the United States

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Judge Strikes Law Banning Demonstrations at Supreme Court
    •      
  2. Study Details Obstacles Confronting Minority Law Students
    •      
  3. NLJ 350 Regional Report: The Hot Markets, and the Cold
    •      
  4. Largest State Poised to Require Practical Skills Training
    •      
  5. Supreme Court Voids Human Gene Patents
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of HUD Forms Draws Supreme Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Restaurant in Union Square Park Ruled Permissible
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Magistrate Judge Finds Few Benefits to Class in Settlement
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Third Circuit Could See Rise in Pay-for-Delay Litigation

Cozen Debt Forgiveness Is Campaign Contribution, Court Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fighting Over The Fifth
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Atlanta School Defendants Rely On New Jersey Officers' Case
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

 
  • About The National Law Journal   |
  • Contact The National Law Journal   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media