Legal Opinion
Ajamian v. Cantorco2e. L.P.
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 16, 2012No. A131025PublishedCited by 89 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
NEEDHAM, J.
CantorC02e, L.P., and Joshua Margolis appeal from an order denying their petition to compel arbitration of respondent’s claims under the Federal Arbitration Act. (9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16.) They contend (1) the arbitration panel, rather than the court, should have decided whether the arbitration provision in respondent’s employment agreement was unconscionable; (2) respondent failed to establish that the arbitration provision was unconscionable, and any unconscionable portion of the provision should have been severed to permit the arbitration to proceed; and (3) alternatively,…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. RandolphSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Stolt-Nielsen S. A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by89 opinions
- Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. MorenoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
- Lorrie Poublon v. C.H. Robinson Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- David Tompkins v. 23andme, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Serafin v. Balco Properties Ltd., LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Carbajal v. CWPSC, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016
84 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.