|
P1425 REVIEW DENIED An arbitration agreement an employee was required to sign as a condition of employment was found procedurally unconscionable because it was a contract of adhesion; it was found substantively unconscionable because it delegated the question of arbitrability to the arbitrator rather than the court, unreasonably limited discovery, and required the employee to contribute to the cost of arbitration.CitationONTIVEROS v DHL (Arbitrability Arbitration) 164 CA4 494 [See: CCP 1283.05; Armendariz v Foundation Health 24 C4 83, T/AT 9/00; Dream Theater v Dream Theater 124 CA4 547, P/AT 1/05; Fitz v NCR Corp 2004 118 CA4 702, P/AT 7/04]
|
|
