Over fierce opposition, U.S. and Pennsylvania courts have repeatedly held that there is a strong public policy favoring the enforcement of extrajudicial contractual binding arbitration provisions, generally involving the sale of goods and services (as statutorily codified).
While arbitration provisions are strictly construed against the drafter and are unenforceable if waived by substantive litigation or by common-law contractual defenses, because arbitrations bear only faint resemblance to judicial court proceedings, are for the most part unappealable and those provisions are traditionally contained in contracts of adhesion, those contentions have generally been held nonpersuasive. So, too, has the constitutional right to trial been likewise held not applicable to the enforcement of an arbitration provision.
This content has been archived.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
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]
