Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1939498
 


 



A Pro-Congress Approach to Arbitration and Unconscionability


Stephen E. Friedman


Widener University Delaware Law School

October 5, 2011

Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol. 106, p. 53, 2011
Widener Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-37

Abstract:     
This Essay endeavors to resolve a current controversy involving the application of the unconscionability doctrine to arbitration agreements. The pro-arbitration policies of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and the anti-arbitration instincts of the unconscionability doctrine are difficult to reconcile. Instead of clarity in this area of law, we have a series of hints and clues, often contradictory, from the Supreme Court. Although Professor David Horton and I share a desire to clarify this area of the law, we have nearly opposite views about how this should be accomplished. This Essay sets forth my position and also responds to Unconscionability Wars, Professor Horton's latest thoughtful effort on the subject.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 17

Keywords: unconscionability, contracts, arbitration, arbitration agreements

JEL Classification: K12


Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: October 6, 2011  

Suggested Citation

Friedman, Stephen E., A Pro-Congress Approach to Arbitration and Unconscionability (October 5, 2011). Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol. 106, p. 53, 2011; Widener Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-37. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1939498

Contact Information

Stephen E. Friedman (Contact Author)
Widener University Delaware Law School ( email )
4601 Concord Pike
Wilmington, DE 19803-0406
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 525
Downloads: 79
Download Rank: 231,412

© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.187 seconds