§Why CasetextPricing

Jose Juan Gonzalez vs. Santa Ana Creek Development

Opposition

19 Cited authorities

  1. AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion

    563 U.S. 333 (2011)   Cited 3,739 times   601 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a ban on collective-action waivers in those contracts worked to "disfavor arbitration"

  2. Doctor's Assocs., Inc. v. Casarotto

    517 U.S. 681 (1996)   Cited 1,857 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that Montana's first-page notice requirement, which governs not ‘any contract,’ but specifically and solely contracts ‘subject to arbitration,’ conflicts with the FAA and is therefore displaced by the federal measure."

  3. Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 83 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,738 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Holding unilateral arbitration provision substantively unconscionable

  4. Reid v. Google, Inc.

    50 Cal.4th 512 (Cal. 2010)   Cited 1,085 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that “the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely, if ever, can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowner's premises”

  5. Pinnacle Museum Tower Association v. Pinnacle Market Development (Us), LLC

    55 Cal.4th 223 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 600 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an arbitration clause in CC&Rs was binding on the homeowners' association, even though the association did not exist as an independent entity when the CC&Rs were drafted and recorded

  6. Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams

    279 F.3d 889 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 342 times
    Holding that an employer's Dispute Resolution Agreement was a contract of adhesion

  7. Donovan v. RRL Corp.

    26 Cal.4th 261 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 286 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a licensed automobile dealer's advertisement regarding a particular vehicle at a specific price constituted an offer in light of the California Vehicle Code, which rendered illegal the failure to sell the vehicle at the advertised price to any person while it remained unsold

  8. Stirlen v. Supercuts, Inc.

    51 Cal.App.4th 1519 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 323 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the element of procedural unconscionability is established where the challenged clause is part of a contract of adhesion

  9. Mercuro v. Superior Court

    96 Cal.App.4th 167 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 253 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding arbitration provision substantively unconscionable where it "compel[ed] arbitration of the claims employees are more likely to bring"

  10. Alexander v. Codemasters Group Limited

    104 Cal.App.4th 129 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 243 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the views expressed in Sambrano and Laird

  11. Section 12900 - Short title

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12900   Cited 2,239 times   9 Legal Analyses

    This part may be known and referred to as the "California Fair Employment and Housing Act." Ca. Gov. Code § 12900 Amended by Stats 2022 ch 48 (SB 189),s 29, eff. 6/30/2022(amended Part heading). Added by Stats. 1980, Ch. 992.