Case Name: In re: CHECKING ACCOUNT OVERDRAFT LITIGATION Maxine Aarons Given, Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. M & T Bank Corporation, a New York corporation, individually and operating by and through M & T Bank, Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, a.k.a. M & T Bank, Defendants-Appellants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-04-29
Citations: 425 F. App'x 857
Docket Number: No. 10-12375
Parties: In re: CHECKING ACCOUNT OVERDRAFT LITIGATION Maxine Aarons Given, Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. M & T Bank Corporation, a New York corporation, individually and operating by and through M & T Bank, Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, a.k.a. M & T Bank, Defendants-Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 425
Pages: 857–857

Head Matter:
In re: CHECKING ACCOUNT OVERDRAFT LITIGATION Maxine Aarons Given, Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. M & T Bank Corporation, a New York corporation, individually and operating by and through M & T Bank, Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, a.k.a. M & T Bank, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 10-12375.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
April 29, 2011.
Edward Adam Webb, G. Franklin Le-mond, Jr., Webb, Klase & Lemond, L.L.C., Atlanta, GA, Scott C. Borison, Legg Law Firm LLC, Frederick, MD, Nicholas A. Carlin, R. Scott Erlewine, David M. Given, Phillips, Erlewine & Given LLP, San Francisco, CA, Anthony C. Depastina, Civil Justice Inc., Baltimore, MD, Robert C. Gilbert, Bruce Rogow, Alters Law Firm, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Matthew R. Alsip, James A. Dunbar, Heather Mitchell, John T. Prisbe, Venable LLP, Baltimore, MD, for Defendants-Appellants.
Before PRYOR and COX, Circuit Judges, and WATKINS, District Judge.
Honorable W. Keith Watkins, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Alabama, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
After oral argument in this case, the United States Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 1740, — L.Ed.2d - (2011). The district court's order denying the motion to compel arbitration is VACATED, and this case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court's opinion.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
. This is an unlimited remand.