New CA Supreme Court Arbitration Case
New California Supreme Court Arbitration Case
Is an Arbitration Agreement Enforceable When There Is Procedural Unconscionability (including tiny, blurry print and rushed presentation) and a Low-to-Moderate Degree of Substantive Unconscionability (including a one-sided carveout tied to later confidentiality agreements)?
The California Supreme Court addressed this issue last month. Below is my one-paragraph case summary from my online publication California Case Summaries™:
Fuentes v. Empire Nissan (2026) _ Cal.5th _ , 2026 WL 265574: The California Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal’s decision, which had reversed the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion to compel arbitration in an employment case. The trial court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding the employment arbitration agreement was unconscionable based on a very high degree of procedural unconscionability (including the agreement’s tiny, blurry print and rushed presentation) and a low-to-moderate degree of substantive unconscionability (including a perceived one-sided carveout tied to later confidentiality agreements). The Court of Appeal reversed and directed the trial court to grant the motion to compel arbitration, reasoning that illegibility goes only to procedural unconscionability and that, properly construed, the confidentiality agreements did not create substantive one-sidedness. The Supreme Court held that format/legibility generally does not itself establish substantive unconscionability, but concluded the Court of Appeal erred by using a pro-arbitration interpretive presumption and by directing an order compelling arbitration rather than remanding. The California Supreme Court reversed and remanded for further trial-court proceedings (including consideration of unresolved validity/assent and related issues) consistent with the clarified unconscionability framework. (February 2, 2026.)
I handle a few select civil cases where I represent plaintiffs or defendants in business, insurance bad faith, personal injury, real property and wrongful death actions. Using my experience as a California civil trial lawyer since 1980, and a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates since 1995, my goal is to get each client the best possible result. My clients get the benefit of big firm experience with small firm attention and reasonable rates. To discuss a potential case, email me at monty@montymcintyre.com, or call me at (619) 990-4312.
Do well and be well.
Best regards,
Monty A. McIntyre, Esq.
Business, Insurance Bad Faith, Real Property and Tort Litigation.
Trial Mentoring™: Trial training & preparation
Podcaster: Trial Alchemy™
Publisher: California Case Summaries™
CA attorney since 1980. ABOTA Member Since 1995
Past President San Diego County Bar Assn., SD ABOTA Chapter
Phone: (619) 990-4312.
Email: monty@montymcintyre.com
