20,004 research outputs found

    Arbitration Revisited: Preemption of California’s Unconscionability Doctrine after Concepcion

    Get PDF
    This commentary looks at a Supreme Court case, Imburgia v. DIRECTV, in which the Court faces the question of whether an arbitration agreement, made pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, preempts state unconscionability doctrine which would render that agreement unenforceable. The Author argues that holding that federal law implementing a policy favoring arbitration fully preempts state law doctrines from preventing the enforcement of arbitration agreements

    Stop Teaching Consideration

    Full text link

    LAND LEASE MARKETS AND AGRICULTURAL EFFICIENCY: THEORY AND EVIDENCE FROM ETHIOPIA

    Get PDF
    This paper develops a theoretical model of land leasing that includes transaction costs of enforcing labor effort, risk pooling motives and non-tradable capital inputs. We test the implications of this model compared to those of the "Marshallian" (unenforceable labor effort) and "New School" (costlessly enforceable effort) perspectives using data collected from four villages in Ethiopia. We find that land lease markets operate relatively efficiently in the villages studied, supporting the New School perspective. Land contract choice is found to depend upon the social relationships between landlords and tenants, but differences in contracts are not associated with significant differences in input use or output value per hectare. We find that other household and village characteristics do affect input use and output value, suggesting imperfections in other factor markets.Land Economics/Use,

    Sound the Alarm: Limitations of Liability in Alarm Service Contracts

    Get PDF
    Home and business owners increasingly rely on alarm systems to protect against theft and property damage. When a burglary or fire occurs and an alarm service customer discovers that the alarm company negligently failed to call the police or fire department, the customer understandably would expect redress for the company’s failure to provide its service. Many customers would be surprised, though, to discover that an alarm company’s liability is often contractually limited to a relatively token amount unrelated to the cost of the service, even when the alarm company is negligent. Some states view these limitations of liability as exculpatory clauses and determine their enforceability based on whether they are unconscionable or violate public policy. Other states view them as liquidated damages and apply a penalty test to determine their enforceability. This Note addresses the differences between these two approaches in the context of the unique remedy difficulties inherent in alarm service contracts. This Note then argues that the prevailing policy rationales for enforcing alarm service provisions that limit a party’s liability for its own negligence are misguided and advocates that these provisions should not be enforced as a matter of public policy

    Arbitration Case Law Update 2013

    Get PDF
    The U.S. Supreme Court and lower state and federal courts continue to decide cases under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) at an astounding rate. This chapter summarizes Supreme Court opinions over the past year that interpret the FAA, as well as selected lower court decisions that apply the FAA and could have an impact on securities arbitration practice

    Fraud and Enforceability: Potential Implications for Federal Circuit Litigation

    Get PDF
    Should fraudulent litigation tactics and testimony affect the validity of underlying patents? What results are possible if the enforceability of a patent turns on the conduct of the applying party not only before the Patent and Trademark Office, but also before circuit courts? The author of the following article considers these questions in light of the recent Aptix Corp. case

    Fraud and Enforceability: Potential Implications for Federal Circuit Litigation

    Get PDF
    Should fraudulent litigation tactics and testimony affect the validity of underlying patents? What results are possible if the enforceability of a patent turns on the conduct of the applying party not only before the Patent and Trademark Office, but also before circuit courts? The author of the following article considers these questions in light of the recent Aptix Corp. case

    Forum Selection Clauses and Consumer Contracts in Canada

    Get PDF
    Every day, billions of people use the online social media platform, Facebook. Facebook requires, as a condition of use, that users “accept” its terms and conditions—which include a forum selection clause nominating California as the exclusive forum for dispute resolution. In Douez v. Facebook, the Supreme Court of Canada considered whether this forum selection clause was enforceable, or whether the plaintiff could proceed with her suit in British Columbia. The Supreme Court of Canada ultimately decided that the forum selection clause was not enforceable. It held that the plaintiff had established “strong cause” for departing from the forum selection clause. The Court premised its decision on two primary considerations: the contract involved a consumer and was one of adhesion, and the claim involved the vindication of privacy rights. The Court’s analysis suffers from several major weaknesses that will undoubtedly cause confusion in this area of law. This Article will examine those weaknesses, and argue that the Supreme Court of Canada actually abandoned the strong cause test that it claimed to be applying. The consequence of the Douez decision is that many forum selection clauses—at least in the consumer context—will be rendered unenforceable. While this may be a salutary development from the perspective of consumer protection, it will undoubtedly have an effect on companies choosing to do business in Canada
    • …
    corecore