Bookmark and Share



» Access to Courts and Court Remedies

» Campaign Finance and Election Laws

» Constitutional Rights and Requirements

» Health, Safety, and Environment

» Open Government and Open Courts

» Representing Consumers

» Workers' Rights

Currently Featured Topics

Government Transparency
Consumer Justice
First Amendment
Health, Safety and the Environment


Read about our work helping lawyers
with cases in the Supreme Court.


  Public Citizen | Litigation Cases ***Search other cases***

Feeney v. Dell Inc.

Topic(s): Arbitration



In Feeney v. Dell, Inc., the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held, before the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, that a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement was unenforceable. Following Concepcion, a lower Massachusetts court held in the ongoing proceedings in Feeney that the class action waiver remained unenforceable because the factual record demonstrated that, under the circumstances in the case, the availability of a class action was essential to the vindication of the substantive right asserted by the plaintiff. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court granted review in order to determine the continued viability of its earlier Feeney ruling. We joined with Public Justice in filing an amicus curiae brief arguing that where there is a factual record demonstrating that a class action is necessary to the protection of the substantive right at issue, Concepcion does not require enforcement of a class action ban in an arbitration clause. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court first accepted our arguments, and then reversed itself following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in American Express v. Italian Colors and held the provision enforceable.

Copyright © 2017 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.

Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation


Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.


To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.