Originally from:

Journal of American Arbitration (JAA) - Vol. 4, No. 1

Preview Page

ARTICLES

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Finds
Modifications to Employment Arbitration
Agreements Unconscionable if Reasonable
Notice Is Not Given and Not Severable if
Unconscionable Provisions Permeate the
Contract
By Tyler Henderson

I. OVERVIEW
Mohammed Al-Safin, a former employee of Circuit City Stores
(Circuit City), filed a complaint against Circuit City, alleging violations
of both federal and Washington state antidiscrimination laws. Circuit
City then filed a motion to compel arbitration in accordance with an
arbitration agreement entitled “Circuit City Dispute Resolution
Agreement” (DRA), which Al-Safin was required to sign before he could
be considered for employment at Circuit City. By signing the DRA, “Al-
Safin agreed to resolve all disputes arising out of his employment with
Circuit City through arbitration in accordance with Circuit City Dispute
Resolution Rules and Procedure (DRRP).” The district court denied
Circuit City’s motion to compel arbitration and Circuit City appealed.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the
district court decision and remanded the case to consider the validity of
the contract under Washington state law, where the contract was entered
into and signed. See Al-Safin v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 46 Fed. Appx.
446, 447 (9th Cir. 2002).