Rejecting the reasoning of two decisions by the Pennsylvania Superior Court, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that arbitration agreements cannot be deemed “unconscionable” solely on the grounds that they require consumers to waive their right to pursue class action claims.

In its 41-page opinion in Gay v. CreditInform, a unanimous three-judge panel said it recognized that the two Superior Court opinions gave the plaintiff support for her claim that the arbitration provision is unconscionable.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]