Trial court granted motion to stay pending arbitration. Affirmed on appeal. On appeal Plaintiff argued that the agreement was procedurally and substantively unconscionable. Reviewing the facts, the court observed that “[a]n unconscionable contract clause is one in which there is an absence of meaningful choice for the contracting parties, coupled with draconian contract terms unreasonably favorable to the other party.” Procedural unconscionability concerns the formation of the agreement and occurs when there is no voluntary meeting of the minds. Substantive unconscionability goes to the contract terms themselves. Regarding procedural unconscionability, plaintiff argued it was a form contract, the resident had no authority to change its terms, he was not represented by counsel, and he did not realize he was waiving his right to a jury. The court rejected these arguments finding that the agreement was not a condition of admission so he could have rejected the entire agreement. There is no requirement in Ohio that an attorney be present when a contract is signed. Regarding notice, the agreement includes a warning that jury rights are waived in bold, capital letters. Finding that the agreement was not procedurally unconscionable, the trial court was affirmed.
Before a guardian or the personal representative of an estate takes office, he or she…
In Georgia, when actions are filed in Probate Court, some people must be notified before…
What is Form 1041 used for? If an estate or trust has gross income of…
IRS Form 56 is used to notify the IRS of the creation or termination of…
On November 15, 2024, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services posted the 2025 spousal…
The word disability doesn't have the same meaning in all contexts. If you have a…