Legal Opinion

Brown v. MHN Government Services, Inc.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 2013No. 87953-2PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJ.M. Johnson, J.

¶1 The narrow question before us is whether an arbitration agreement signed by respondents Barbara Brown and Cindy Hiett is permeated with unconscionability and therefore unenforceable under California law.1 We hold that the forum selection and punitive damages provisions are not unconscionable and that the arbitrator selection, statute of limitations, and fee shifting provisions are unconscionable. The unconscionable taint cannot be removed through severance. We hold that because the arbitration agreement is permeated with unconscionability, it is unenforceable. We note that our *262holdings are…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. RandolphSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. CasarottoSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Pinnacle Museum Tower Ass'n v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. LaCoursiere v. CamWest Development, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Romney v. Franciscan Medical GroupCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
  3. Fagerstrom v. Amazon.com, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2015
  4. Brinkley v. Monterey Fin. Servs., Inc., California Court of Appeal, 4th District2015
  5. Gorden v. Lloyd Ward & Associates, PCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014

14 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