Whitney v. Alltel Communications, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “since no single customer could undertake a case against [the defendant], the company could continue its improper and deceptive charges ad infinitum since none of its customers would have a practical remedy to bring about a stop to the conduct.”
• invalidating as unconscionable an arbitration provision barring consumer claims from being raised as class actions
• invalidating as unconscionable an arbitration provision barring consumer claims from being raised as class actions
• “Prohibiting class treatment of these claims would leave consumers with relatively small claims without a practical remedy....”
• \Prohibiting class treatment of these claims would leave consumers with relatively small claims without a practical remedy . . . .\
• describing a customer of Alltel’s as a “wireless telephone customer” and citing Powertel, Inc. v. Bexley, 743 So.2d 570, 572 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).