In Williams v. Medley Opportunity Fund II, LP, plaintiffs Christine Williams and Michael Stermel obtained payday loans from American Web Loan, Inc. (AWL), an online entity owned by the Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians. The loan agreement stated that the loan was governed by tribal law and that the borrowers consented to the application of tribal law. The plaintiffs filed a purported class action against AWL's holding company, Red Stone, Inc., and three members of AWL's board of directors, asserting that AWL charged unlawfully high interest rates, in violation of federal and Pennsylvania law, including the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. 1961-1968.
The defendants moved to compel arbitration pursuant to the arbitration clause in the loan agreement. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the defendants' motion, holding that the loan agreement, which provided that only tribal law would apply in arbitration, stripped the plaintiffs of their right to assert statutory claims and were therefore unenforceable. Defendants appealed.
On appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding that because AWL permits borrowers to raise disputes in arbitration only under tribal law, and such a limitation constitutes a prospective waiver of statutory rights, its arbitration agreement violates public policy and is therefore unenforceable.
The Third Circuit specifically rejected defendants' argument that plaintiffs could bring similar RICO-like claims under tribal law and receive similar relief. The panel noted, "The question is whether a party can bring and effectively pursue the federal claim - not whether some other law is a sufficient substitute."
Williams v. Medley Opportunity Fund II, LP, 965 F.3d 229 (3d Cir. July 14, 2020)
©2026 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.
Perspectives on reinsurance and arbitration law and practice.
Recent Posts
Editorial Contacts
Shareholder
Shareholder
Of Counsel
Shareholder
Shareholder
