- USA—court rejects argument that JAMS arbitration agreement was unconscionable (Monster Energy v City Beverages)
- What did the court decide?
Law360: A California judge rejected arguments that JAMS was biased in a dispute involving Monster Energy when it urged the US Supreme Court to clarify guidelines on arbitrator disclosure requirements, calling it ‘highly speculative’ that the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services provider’s position on the issue could affect its arbitrators’ impartiality. The judge ordered the parties, under their arbitration agreement, to arbitrate their dispute before JAMS.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial