« No agreement for enhanced judicial review | Main | Nondisclosure voids arbitration award »
Anti-class-action clause was unconscionable
October 21, 2005 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo
A franchise agreement contained an agreement to arbitrate disputes, and specifically barred class action arbitrations. The California Court of Appeal now says such a ban on class actions is unconscionable. Not only that, the court ordered that the individual claims be consolidated. Independent Association of Mailbox Center Owners v. Superior Court (Mail Boxes Etc., USA) (California Ct App; decided 09/16/2005; ordered published 10/13/2005).
I thought the opinion was bit cavalier in its unconscionability analysis. Typically this is a fact-specific inquiry. However, the court's reasoning seemed to be that franchisees are similar to employees and consumers, so they sort of automatically qualify for unconscionability protection. Just a bit too patronizing for my taste.
EEOC | NLRB | Supreme Court | Employment Law Blog | Arbitration Blog | Employment Law 101
