Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Delta Funding Corp. v. Harris

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided August 9, 2006Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Zazzali

To the extent that the majority opinion strikes down certain provisions of the arbitration agreement as unconscionable, I concur. However, I disagree with the majority’s conclusions regarding certain other provisions and would find them unconscionable. Additionally, even if I were to accept the majority’s conclusions regarding the individual provisions, I nonetheless believe that the objectionable provisions cannot be severed from the agreement and that the agreement as a whole should be held cumulatively unconscionable. For those reasons, I respectfully dissent.

I

As Justice LaVecchia notes,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Virginia Ex Rel. Virginia State BarSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Jacob v. Norris, McLaughlin & MarcusSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
  3. Rudbart v. North Jersey District Water Supply CommissionSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
  4. Muhammad v. County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, DelawareSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2006
  5. In Re the Cadillac V8-6-4 Class ActionSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2004

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API