Arbitration and Unconscionability After Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto

37 Pages Posted: 26 Jun 2007

See all articles by Stephen J. Ware

Stephen J. Ware

University of Kansas - School of Law

Abstract

In Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto, the Supreme Court again endorsed a contractual approach to arbitration law. In particular, the Court requires lower courts to apply contract law principles when determining whether arbitration agreements are unconscionable. However, the Court did not explain how the unconscionability doctrine would actually be applied to typical arbitration cases. The author here picks up where the Court left off and in so doing advocates the contractual approach over competing approaches to issues of unconscionability in arbitration.

Suggested Citation

Ware, Stephen J., Arbitration and Unconscionability After Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Casarotto. Wake Forest Law Review, Vol. 31, No. 1001, 1996, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=995283

Stephen J. Ware (Contact Author)

University of Kansas - School of Law ( email )

Green Hall
1535 W. 15th Street
Lawrence, KS 66045-7577
United States
785-864-9209 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.ku.edu/ware

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
126
Abstract Views
1,205
Rank
404,863
PlumX Metrics