ALEXANDER M. LITTLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. AUTO STIEGLER, INC., Defendant and Appellant., 29 Cal. 4th 1064

Summary

On appeal, the employee argued, inter alia, the arbitration agreement that permitted either party to appeal an arbitration award of more than $ 50,000 to a second arbitrator was unconscionable and that, because it was unconscionable, the entire arbitration agreement was invalid. The appellate court held that the appellate arbitration provision was unconscionable. The court noted that, although the parties could justify an asymmetrical arbitration agreement when there was a legitimate commercial need, that need had to be other than the employer's desire to maximize its advantage in the arbitration process. The court held that there was no such justification for the $ 50,000 threshold. The provision was geared toward giving the employer a substantial opportunity to overturn a sizable arbitration award. Therefore, the appeal provision was unconscionably one-sided and could not be enforced. The court also found, however, that the provision should have been severed and the rest of the ...