Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civil Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debate splits banks and consumer advocates; bill to curb pre-dispute jury waivers fails
Summary
Senate Bill 558, which would have restricted pre-dispute contractual jury-waiver clauses for consumer contracts, drew testimony from affected borrowers and banking representatives; after lengthy debate and an immediate‑consideration motion, the committee ultimately voted the bill down on roll call.
Senate Bill 558, brought by Senator Stubblefield, would have narrowed the enforceability of pre‑dispute contractual waivers of jury trial in certain consumer contracts. Sponsors and civil‑liberty advocates argued the measure protects constitutional and procedural rights; banks and in‑house counsel warned of higher litigation costs and disruptions to lending.
Trial lawyer Joey McCutcheon and Kenneth Tilley, who said he lost the right to a jury trial in litigation after a bank’s pre‑dispute waiver, testified for the bill. Tilley described consequential personal harm: "The bill last year had a retroactivity clause in it that killed my right to jury trial that was remanded to me by the Supreme Court," he said.
Bank representatives including John W. Adams, market president and CEO of First Security Bank in Conway, and Hunter Wendell, legal counsel for Malvern National Bank, opposed the measure. Wendell warned the change would put Arkansas out of step with federal law and most states and could force costly litigation: "If Senate Bill 558 is adopted, lenders and banks will be forced to litigate these issues before juries, which will result in significantly higher legal cost," he said.
The committee moved to immediate consideration, then took a final vote. After debate and roll‑call procedures, the bill failed.
