The U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari to Jackson v. Rent-A-CenterWest, Inc. , No. 07-16164 (9th Cir. Sept. 9, 2009). The question presented is whether a district court is in all cases required to determine claims that an arbitration agreement subject to the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) is unconscionable, even when the parties to the contract have clearly and unmistakably assigned this “gateway” issue to the arbitrator for decision. Find Professor Sarah Cole’s commentary on the Ninth Circuit opinion here.
Stay tuned to Disputing for more legal developments!
Technorati Tags: law, ADR, arbitration
Tags: unconscionability
[...] On September 23, 2009 we reported on the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Jackson v. Rent-a-Center West, Inc., ___ F.3d ___, slip op. (9th Cir. Sept. 9, 2009), petition for cert. granted Jan. 15, 2010 (No. 09-497). (Prior post here) As reported in Disputing, on January 15, 2010, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear Rent-a-Center West’s appeal. (Disputing post here) [...]
[...] whether courts or arbitrators should decide the issue of unconscionability. (previously discussed here). Here is an excerpt: The Federal Arbitration Act makes arbitration agreements as enforceable as [...]
[...] Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Arbitration Unconscionability Case (Jan. 18, 2010) [...]