California Supreme Court,
Civil Litigation
Sep. 17, 2019
Arbitration unconscionability analysis is revitalized, especially as to unpaid wage claims
The California Supreme Court's decision in OTO, LLC v. Kho does not change the standards for determining unconscionability in an arbitration agreement, but it is very important nevertheless because of how it applies the existing standards to the facts at hand, particularly if the employee's claim involves unpaid wages
Michael D. Marcus
Mediator
ADR Services, Inc.
Judge Marcus (Ret.) has a well-deserved reputation throughout California as a skilled, personable and forceful mediator and a fair and impartial arbitrator, having been honored by the Daily Journal as a "Top Neutral" for six years and as a "Southern California Super Lawyer" for 2008-2020. He has mediated over 3,000 matters and arbitrated more than 100 cases.
The California Supreme Court's decision in OTO, LLC v. Kho, 2019 DJDAR 8320 (Aug. 29, 2019), does not change the standards for determining unconscionability in an arbitration agreement, but it is very important nevertheless because of how it applies the existing standards to the facts at hand, particularly if the employee's claim involves unpaid wages.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In