Gatton

Gatton v. T-MOBILE USA, INC.

Bad Law
152 Cal. App. 4th 571·61 Cal. Rptr. 3d 344
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 22, 2007A112082, A112084California11,930 words

Opinion

Opinion

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION. [*]

In this consolidated appeal, T-Mobile USA, Inc. appeals from an order denying its motion to compel arbitration of actions challenging the early termination fee charged to cellular telephone service subscribers and challenging the practice of selling locked handsets that a subscriber cannot use when switching carriers. Mobile contends the court erred in concluding that the arbitration clause in its service agreement is unconscionable.

In the published portion of this opinion, we hold that the adhesive nature of the service agreement established a minimal degree of procedural unconscionability notwithstanding the availability of market alternatives and that the high degree of substantive unconscionability arising from the class action waiver rendered the arbitration provision unenforceable.

In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we reject T-Mobile's contention that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts any rule that class action waivers are unconscionable under California law.

We affirm the trial court order.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

T-Mobile USA, Inc. (T-Mobile) is a cellular telephone provider in California.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.