California Court of Appeal

In a construction defect action, denial of builders' motion to compel arbitration based on a warranty that included arbitration provisions is affirmed where: 1) because plaintiffs are claiming, under the general rubric of unconscionability, that they never knowingly agreed to the arbitration provisions, the trial court, and not the arbitrator, had to resolve the unconscionability claim; and 2) the arbitration provisions were unconscionable because they were contained in a contract of adhesion, and they violated plaintiffs- reasonable expectations.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/12/2008
• Published 03/12/2008

Judges

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Gemmill Thornton & Baldridge, Bruce M. Thornton, Carlos Yguico, Los Angeles;  Cooksey, Toolen, Gage, Duffy & Woog and Richard E. Buck, Costa Mesa, for Defendants and Appellant., Kasdan Simonds Riley & Vaughan and Barry C. Vaughan, Concord, for Plaintiffs and Respondents.