Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Unconscionable Construction: How The Ninth Circuit Evades The Faa By Severing Arbitration Agreements As Unconscionable Note, Daniel B. Mitchell
Unconscionable Construction: How The Ninth Circuit Evades The Faa By Severing Arbitration Agreements As Unconscionable Note, Daniel B. Mitchell
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Bridge Fund Capital Corp. v. FastBucks Franchise Corp. illustrates a recent manifestation of an ongoing judicial hostility to arbitration. As the Supreme Court has developed its FAA jurisprudence to limit the severance of arbitration agreements, many lower courts have continued to develop legal justifications to circumvent these restrictions. The FAA's savings clause does afford some latitude for severance of arbitration agreements, but the Supreme Court has not yet defined the limits of the savings clause, nor whether the general contract defense and their justifications are sufficient to supersede FAA policy. Bridge Fund shows how the doctrine of unconscionability it being …
New Use Of The Doctrine Of Unconscionability To Invalidate Arbitration Agreements In Consumer Contracts, The Note, Valerie Dixon
New Use Of The Doctrine Of Unconscionability To Invalidate Arbitration Agreements In Consumer Contracts, The Note, Valerie Dixon
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Manfredi v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield suggests that this old judicial hostility is alive and well in Missouri jurisprudence. In an effort to level the playing field between parties of unequal bargaining power, Missouri courts have applied the unconscionability doctrine as a way to sidestep the United States Supreme Court's asserted policy favoring arbitration over litigation.7 This note considers the new approach of Missouri courts in invalidating arbitration agreements through the doctrine of unconscionability in the consumer context.