Alabama Supreme Court weighs whether qui tam-style suits escape arbitration and Rule 23 oversight

At an oral argument before the Supreme Court of Alabama, attorneys for competing parties sparred over whether lawsuits brought under Alabama Code §8-1-150(b) may seek money on behalf of unnamed game players without being subject to those players’ arbitration agreements or Rule 23 class-action protections.

Appellants’ counsel told the court the complaints are "unprecedented" and that plaintiffs are attempting to recover money spent on internet games by "thousands of unnamed people" who agreed to arbitration with the game companies. Appellant counsel argued that either the Federal Arbitration Act or the court’s precedents require the trial court to compel arbitration of those claims. "The Federal Arbitration Act required the circuit court to compel these plaintiffs to the same arbitration to which the players of these games ... had agreed," counsel said.

The appellee’s lawyer, Johnny Norris, told the court the statute at issue historically functions like a qui tam or relator cause of action and that…