Legal Opinion
Stirlen v. Supercuts, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 9, 1997No. A070573PublishedCited by 174 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KLINE, P. J.
The San Francisco Superior Court refused to enforce a compulsory arbitration clause of an employment contract on the grounds it was against public policy and unconscionable. We find this determination correct and hold that, in the circumstances of this case, the governing state law pertaining to unconscionable contracts (Civ. Code, § 1670.5) is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act. (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-14.)
I
Defendants Supercuts, Inc., and David E. Lipson, its president and chief executive officer (hereinafter collectively referred to as Supercuts), appeal from an order…
2Cases cited61 opinions
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by174 opinions
- Connie A. Nagrampa v. Mailcoups, Inc. The American Arbitration AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
- Catherine Ingle v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., a Virginia CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Oto, L. L.C. v. KhoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
- Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co.California Supreme Court · 2015
169 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.