![Arbitration](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/399/2018/03/Arbitration-Article-201803142023.jpg)
Computer Signatures and Arbitration Contracts May Not Mix
The lesson: keep it simple, understand arbitration law, and avoid potential duplication and confusion by saying it "well" the first and only time.
January 04, 2021 at 12:04 PM
6 minute read
Lawyers drafting contracts and the people who "sign" or otherwise "accept" them should heed the facts in Knight v. Vivint Solar, __ N.J. Super. __, 2020 N.J. Super. LEXIS 240 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Dec. 2, 2020). At least two lessons are suggested: (a) When drafting, say it once and say it well, but do not over-commit to tech. (b) When entering a contract, all parties should have and maintain fully executed copies.
Knight concerned a long-term agreement to install solar panels on a home. When problems arose regarding payments, the homeowner sued and the merchant moved to compel arbitration under the provider contract. The parties presented the Law Division with conflicting stories regarding the customer's agreeing to the contract by electronic signature on the salesman's computer. The merchant explained its standard procedure for obtaining permissions to use electronic signatures, and the customer alleged that she had not seen or agreed to the terms. In particular, she denied agreeing to "check" a box next to a short statement by which she agreed to be bound by the arbitration clause a few pages earlier in the contract, which notably delegated arbitrability questions to the arbitrator. The Law Division ordered discovery regarding contract formation and eventually ordered arbitration of the contract formation issues in light of Goffe v. Foulke Management Corp., decided earlier that year. In Goffe, the Supreme Court confirmed the principle of severability of the arbitration clause from the contract in which it was contained and found that the parties may delegate to the arbitrator the question of whether the contract was formed, unless the formation of the arbitration clause itself is disputed.
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![Bring NJ's 'Pretrial Opportunity Program' into the Open Bring NJ's 'Pretrial Opportunity Program' into the Open](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/8f/58/bc6d396a475dae95863977b92b68/released-767x633.jpg)
![Social Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World Social Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/14/5a/e76bf7bd45fdbb655d1d58c95cb8/bauchner-2-767x633.jpg)
Social Media Policy for Judges Provides Guidance in a Changing World
3 minute read![Bank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action Bank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/402/2022/11/Bank-of-America-Sign01-767x633.jpg)
Bank of America's Cash Sweep Program Attracts New Legal Fire in Class Action
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Parties’ Reservation of Rights Defeats Attempt to Enforce Settlement in Principle
- 2ACC CLO Survey Waves Warning Flags for Boards
- 3States Accuse Trump of Thwarting Court's Funding Restoration Order
- 4Microsoft Becomes Latest Tech Company to Face Claims of Stealing Marketing Commissions From Influencers
- 5Coral Gables Attorney Busted for Stalking Lawyer
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250