PRETRIAL ADJUDICATION
...Contract Arbitration
......Opposing Arbitration
.........Unconscionability
............Adhesion Contracts
 18 Cards On This Topic:
  • Because Circuit City presented arbitration agrmt to employee on adhere-or-reject basis, agrmt was procedurally unconscionable; as many aspects also substantively unconscionable, entire agrmt unenforceable.
  • Adhesive nature of franchise K not itself bar to enforcement of arbitration provision.
  • Adhesion K enforceable if not unreasonable or unconscionable.
  • Principles governing adhesion Ks does not bar enforcement of arb clause, as terms of health plan represented product of negotiation between parties.
  • Error to find agreement to arbitrate was unconscionable where incorporation of arbitration policy in employee handbook salvaged the agreement by establishing unmistakable mutual obligation.
  • Since Ps claimed they never knowingly agreed to arbitration provisions, trial court had to resolve unconscionability claim; provisions were unconscionable as they were in adhesion K, and violated Ps' reasonable expectations.
  • Adhesive nature of cell phone service agrmt established procedural unconscionability despite market alternatives; high degree of substantive unconscionability coming from class action waiver rendered arb provision unenforceable.
  • Contract young siblings signed to appear on Extreme Makeover: Home Edition contained procedurally and substantively unconscionable arbitration clause and was unenforceable.
  • "Take it or leave it" arb agreement, evidencing lack of mutuality, cost-sharing and shortened statutes of limitations, was so procedurally and substantively unconscionable as to be wholly unenforceable.
  • Arb. clause in employ. agrmt, executed by employee in settlement of previous dispute with employer's predecessor, was procedurally and substantively unconscionable and was not a "post-dispute agreement.
  • Discovery provision in arb K did not provide weaker party with sufficient discovery to vindicate her public claim, failing to satisfy Armendariz requirements; K lacked basic fairness in requiring arbitration of P's claims, not D's.
  • Court did not err in denying D's motion to compel arbitration where arbitration clause, providing for Better Business Bureau arbitration rules, was unconscionable.
  • Arbitration clause in rental agreement lacked sufficient "bilaterality" and was unconscionable.
  • Ct. App. reversed where it permitted enforcement of unconscionable clause allowing arbitral review only of awards >$50,000.
  • Countrywide’s arbitration agreement unenforceable as it was unconscionable, prevented employee from vindicating unwaivable statutory rights and offending provisions were not severable.
  • K not unconscionable as it was not adhesion K and P had opportunity to negotiate contract provisions with D or a third party.
  • Petition to deny arbitration affirmed because arbitration provision was unconscionable—hence unenforceable, and P borrowers may have had no alternative sources for loans.
  • Determination that K is adhesive does not necessarily defeat arbitration clause.


    •