Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Whitt v. Prosper Funding LLC

Whitt v. Prosper Funding LLC

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York

July 14, 2015, Decided; July 14, 2015, Filed

1:15-cv-136-GHW

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge:

Plaintiff Larry Whitt brought this action against Defendants Prosper Funding LLC and Prosper Marketplace, Inc. (together, "Prosper"), alleging that Prosper discriminated against him based on a disability, in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12182, and the corresponding provisions of state and municipal law. Prosper moves to stay or dismiss this action and to compel arbitration pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the following reasons, the Court holds that Whitt entered into an enforceable agreement to arbitrate his claims in this case, and that [*2]  the appropriate remedy under the circumstances is to dismiss rather than stay the case in favor of arbitration. Accordingly, Prosper's motion to dismiss and to compel arbitration is granted.

I. Background

A. Whitt's Allegations

According to the allegations in the complaint, Prosper operates a peer-to-peer lending service that connects potential borrowers with potential investors. See Dkt. No. 1 (Complaint) at ¶ 8. Prosper also services each loan on behalf of matched borrowers and investors. Id. On September 1, 2014, Whitt, who is deaf, applied for a loan through Prosper's website. Id. ¶¶ 14-15. In the process of attempting to confirm his identity, Whitt called Prosper using a Video Relay Service, which is a service that allows a hearing impaired individual to communicate by telephone using a sign language interpreter as a mediator. Id. ¶¶ 18-19. Prosper informed Whitt that its policy was to not accept calls made using a Video Relay Service and that it would not accept his call on that basis. Id. ¶ 23. In connection with this policy, Prosper required Whitt to provide additional proof of identity and suspended his account. Id. ¶¶ 34-50. Whitt alleges that Prosper's conduct violated the [*3]  ADA and the corresponding state and municipal statutes. Id. ¶¶ 51-88.

B. Agreement to Arbitrate

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91413 *; 2015 WL 4254062

LARRY WHITT, Plaintiff, -v - PROSPER FUNDING LLC and PROSPER MARKETPLACE, INC., Defendants.

CORE TERMS

arbitration, costs, arbitration agreement, website, terms, hyperlink, invalidate, Consumer, click, arbitration provision, parties, compel arbitration, borrower, assent, terms of the agreement, quotation, courts, notice, marks, user, box, registration, conspicuous, speculative, declining, enforcing, prevail, Reply