Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In an appeal from the district court's order dismissing plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. section 1981 race discrimination claim and compelling arbitration, the order is affirmed in part where the district court did not err in determining that the cost-sharing provision of the parties' arbitration agreement was not substantively unconscionable. However, the ruling is reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the question of whether the parties' agreement was unconscionable was for the court to decide; and 2) the district court failed to address whether certain provisions of the agreement were substantively unconscionable.
Submitted November 21, 2008
Filed September 9, 2009
Opinion by Judge Thomas
Dissent by Judge Hall
Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.