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\u27s 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
In Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto, the Supreme Court again endorsed a contractual approach t...
Due to the high costs of litigation and the backlog on court dockets, parties to a contract are begi...
Arbitration clauses in contracts require consumers to waive their rights to bring litigation in cour...
As a means of countering the pro-arbitration stance taken by the Supreme Court, a number of lower co...
In recent years, the inclusion of arbitration agreements in consumer product contracts has become in...
Bridge Fund Capital Corp. v. FastBucks Franchise Corp. illustrates a recent manifestation of an ongo...
States have long relied on the doctrines of unconscionability and public policy to protect individua...
The American system of arbitration is constantly evolving. From the first formal arbitration tribun...
This Article first explores the Supreme Court\u27s initially reluctant application of the FAA\u27s c...
Arbitration has been demonized in the media and consumer protection debates, often without empirical...
In Davis v. O\u27Melveny & Myers, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether an arbitrati...
Mandatory arbitration provisions in contracts of adhesion expose the difficult tension between indiv...
This Article examines the California courts\u27 unconscionability jurisprudence, highlighting the di...
This Article evaluates how state courts have applied the unconscionability doctrine to contracts, in...
The Federal Arbitration Act ( FAA ) allows for arbitration to be a medium by which parties may settl...
In Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto, the Supreme Court again endorsed a contractual approach t...
Due to the high costs of litigation and the backlog on court dockets, parties to a contract are begi...
Arbitration clauses in contracts require consumers to waive their rights to bring litigation in cour...
As a means of countering the pro-arbitration stance taken by the Supreme Court, a number of lower co...
In recent years, the inclusion of arbitration agreements in consumer product contracts has become in...
Bridge Fund Capital Corp. v. FastBucks Franchise Corp. illustrates a recent manifestation of an ongo...
States have long relied on the doctrines of unconscionability and public policy to protect individua...
The American system of arbitration is constantly evolving. From the first formal arbitration tribun...
This Article first explores the Supreme Court\u27s initially reluctant application of the FAA\u27s c...
Arbitration has been demonized in the media and consumer protection debates, often without empirical...
In Davis v. O\u27Melveny & Myers, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether an arbitrati...
Mandatory arbitration provisions in contracts of adhesion expose the difficult tension between indiv...
This Article examines the California courts\u27 unconscionability jurisprudence, highlighting the di...
This Article evaluates how state courts have applied the unconscionability doctrine to contracts, in...
The Federal Arbitration Act ( FAA ) allows for arbitration to be a medium by which parties may settl...
In Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto, the Supreme Court again endorsed a contractual approach t...
Due to the high costs of litigation and the backlog on court dockets, parties to a contract are begi...
Arbitration clauses in contracts require consumers to waive their rights to bring litigation in cour...