Montana court rules against credit-card issuer
Court Alerts
The Montana Supreme Court says a credit-card issuer cannot amend a cardholder agreement to add an arbitration clause, merely by enclosing a "bill stuffer" notice with the cardholder's monthly bill.
The court in a 5-1 ruling said the practice "does not provide sufficient notice to the consumer" about a change that would restrict his or her access to the courts.
The ruling came in a case brought against the Herbergers department stores by a Kalispell woman, Santana Kortum, who is an attorney. It reverses a District Court ruling that granted Herbergers' motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss the lawsuit, and sent the case back to the District Court for further proceedings.
"We conclude that making a change in a credit agreement by way of a "bill stuffer" does not provide sufficient notice to the consumer on which acceptance of the unilateral change to a contract can be expressly or implicitly found." Justice James C. Nelson wrote for the court. "Consequently, Herbergers' unilateral attempt to amend its original cardholder agreement to include an arbitration clause was ineffective.
Concurring in the opinion were Justices John Warner, Patricia Cotter, W. William Leaphart and Brian Morris. Chief Justice Mike McGrath did not participate in the ruling.
Related listings
-
Court refuses to expand minority voting rights
Court Alerts 03/11/2009The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a part of the Voting Rights Act aimed at helping minorities elect their preferred candidates only applies in electoral districts where minorities make up more than half the population. The decision could make it ha...
-
Bernard Madoff expected to speak in court Tuesday
Court Alerts 03/10/2009Bernard Madoff (MAY'-dawf) was likely to speak in court in an attempt to clear his lawyer of any potential conflicts of interest. Defense attorney Ira Lee Sorkin's late father once had an account with Madoff. The lawyer also represented two Madoff-li...
-
Court refuses to get involved in tobacco fight
Court Alerts 03/09/2009The Supreme Court has refused to get in the middle of a patent fight over a way to cure tobacco that may make it less carcinogenic. The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., who is being sued by Star Scientifi...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.