|
P1267 Since parties would not ordinarily expect an arbitrator, rather than a court, to determine the arbitrator's jurisdiction, a provision calling for arbitrator determination of unconscionability is substantively unconscionable; an arbitration agreement contained in an employment agreement received through interoffice mail by an employee who was not told she had a choice and believed it was a condition of continued employment was procedurally unconscionable.CitationMURPHY v CHECK 'N GO (Arbitrator's Jurisdiction) 156 CA4 138 [See: CivC 1668, 1670.5; Gentry v Superior Court 42 C4 443, P/AT 11/07; Discover v Superior Court 36 C4 148, P/AT 7/05]
|
|
