§Why CasetextPricing

27 Cited authorities

  1. AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion

    563 U.S. 333 (2011)   Cited 4,023 times   605 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a ban on collective-action waivers in those contracts worked to "disfavor arbitration"

  2. EPIC Sys. Corp. v. Lewis

    138 S. Ct. 1612 (2018)   Cited 992 times   169 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under Concepcion , "courts may not allow a contract defense to reshape traditional individualized arbitration" and "a rule seeking to declare individualized arbitration proceedings off limits" is preempted by the FAA

  3. Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams

    532 U.S. 105 (2001)   Cited 1,614 times   52 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the phrase "any other class of workers engaged in ... commerce," following the specific examples of seamen and railroad employees, includes only "transportation workers," because construing it to include all other workers "fails to give independent effect to the statute’s enumeration of the specific categories of workers" that precede it

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

    24 Cal.4th 83 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,858 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding unilateral arbitration provision substantively unconscionable

  5. Iskanian v. CSL Transportation Los Angeles, LLC

    59 Cal.4th 348 (Cal. 2014)   Cited 743 times   145 Legal Analyses
    Holding that arbitration provisions banning class-action litigation or collective arbitration of employment-related claims are enforceable under the NLRA and the FAA's saving clause, but also holding that arbitration provisions banning representative claims under California's Private Attorneys General Act violates that Act

  6. Saint Agnes Medical Center v. PacifiCare of California

    31 Cal.4th 1187 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 495 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding the prejudice results from a party's expenditure on defending against motions that reflect a position on arbitrability

  7. Vandenberg v. Superior Court

    21 Cal.4th 815 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 491 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it is "incorrect" to "distinguish contract from tort liability for purposes of the CGL insurance coverage phrase `legally obligated to pay as damages'"

  8. Stirlen v. Supercuts, Inc.

    51 Cal.App.4th 1519 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 336 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. A & M Produce Co. v. FMC Corp.

    135 Cal.App.3d 473 (Cal. Ct. App. 1982)   Cited 390 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding unconscionable a disclaimer of warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code where there was "allocation of commercial risks in a socially or economically unreasonable manner"

  10. 24 Hour Fitness, Inc. v. Superior Court

    66 Cal.App.4th 1199 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 224 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the modification provision did not render the contract illusory

  11. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,566 times   319 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  12. Section 1 - "Maritime transactions" and "commerce" defined; exceptions to operation of title

    9 U.S.C. § 1   Cited 12,375 times   212 Legal Analyses
    Defining the word "commerce" in the language of the Commerce Clause itself

  13. Section 2 - Validity, irrevocability, and enforcement of agreements to arbitrate

    9 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 11,451 times   121 Legal Analyses
    Granting federal jurisdiction where there is "a transaction involving [interstate] commerce"

  14. Section 1281 - Generally

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1281   Cited 534 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Explaining an arbitration agreement may only be invalidated upon the same "grounds as exist for the revocation of any contract"