Common Contracts
4 similar null contracts
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIAMay 5th, 2020
The automobile sales contract in the present case has an arbitration agreement that provides, among other things, that arbitral awards of $0 or over $100,000 as well as grants but not denials of injunctive relief may be appealed to a panel of arbitrators. The arbitration agreement also has provisions that require the party appealing the award to front the costs of the appeal, preserve the right of the parties to go to small claims court and to pursue self-help remedies, and waive the right to class action litigation or arbitration. The agreement further provides that if the class waiver is deemed unenforceable, then the entire arbitration agreement shall be unenforceable.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIANovember 10th, 2018
The trial court held, prior to Concepcion, that the class waiver was unconscionable and invalidated the entire arbitration agreement based on a poison pill provision that said: ―If a waiver of class action rights is deemed or found to be unenforceable for any reason in a case in which class action allegations have been made, the remainder of this Arbitration Clause shall be unenforceable.‖ The Court of Appeal, deciding the case after Concepcion, took no position on the enforceability of the class waiver. Sanchez now advances several arguments for why the trial court‘s decision was correct, but none is persuasive.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIAAugust 4th, 2015
The trial court held, prior to Concepcion, that the class waiver was unconscionable and invalidated the entire arbitration agreement based on a poison pill provision that said: “If a waiver of class action rights is deemed or found to be unenforceable for any reason in a case in which class action allegations have been made, the remainder of this Arbitration Clause shall be unenforceable.” The Court of Appeal, deciding the case after Concepcion, took no position on the enforceability of the class waiver. Sanchez now advances several arguments for why the trial court’s decision was correct, but none is persuasive.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIAJuly 31st, 2015
The trial court held, prior to Concepcion, that the class waiver was unconscionable and invalidated the entire arbitration agreement based on a poison pill provision that said: ―If a waiver of class action rights is deemed or found to be unenforceable for any reason in a case in which class action allegations have been made, the remainder of this Arbitration Clause shall be unenforceable.‖ The Court of Appeal, deciding the case after Concepcion, took no position on the enforceability of the class waiver. Sanchez now advances several arguments for why the trial court‘s decision was correct, but none is persuasive.
