Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Low-Value &(And) Predictably Small: When Should Class-Arbitration Waivers Be Invalidated As Unconscionable, Christopher B. Mckinney
Low-Value &(And) Predictably Small: When Should Class-Arbitration Waivers Be Invalidated As Unconscionable, Christopher B. Mckinney
Journal of Dispute Resolution
In Muhammad v. County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, the New Jersey Supreme Court chose the interests of consumers over liberally construed Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) policies in deciding that a no class-arbitration provision contained within a payday loan contract was unconscionable. The court used state law contract principles to invalidate the clause, finding that the clause violated several state public policies. Particularly important to the court was the fact that individual claims for damages would be nominal, and thus individual vindication of statutory rights would prove too costly to be practical. In making this distinction, the court suggested a preference …
Little Fish In A Big Sea: Should Consumer Protection Statutes Override Class Arbitration Waivers, A, Thomas Wilmowski
Little Fish In A Big Sea: Should Consumer Protection Statutes Override Class Arbitration Waivers, A, Thomas Wilmowski
Journal of Dispute Resolution
As arbitration agreements have become increasingly commonplace in dealings between large companies and their subscribers, courts have taken a strong interest in protecting consumer rights. As part of this protection, courts have to apply federal statutes, protecting the right to treble damages and recovery of attorney's fees in the context of mass arbitration agreements. The difficulty comes in attempting to allow companies to exercise their freedom of contract while protecting consumers with little bargaining power. Although other courts have largely favored arbitration, and upheld its applicability, a clash remains between consumer protection statutes and the waiver of those statutory rights …