Kinney

Kinney v. United Healthcare Services, Inc.

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 255·70 Cal. App. 4th 1322·83 Cal. Rptr. 2d 348·99 Daily Journal DAR 2980·79 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 894
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 29, 1999D028873California3,576 words

Opinion

Opinion

McINTYRE, J.

J.United Healthcare Services, Inc., and Linda Hansen-Kyle (collectively, United) appeal an order denying their motion to require Kathleen Kinney to pursue her employment-based claims against them in arbitration. United contends that the trial court erred in finding that the arbitration provision contained in its employee handbook was unenforceable for lack of mutuality and argues that none of Kinney’s other contentions in the proceedings below provide a basis for finding the provision unenforceable. We find the terms of the arbitration agreement so unconscionable as to preclude its enforcement and thus affirm the order.

Factual and Procedural Background

Kinney worked as a utilization control consultant for Metra Health and its predecessor in interest, beginning in June 1989. In early 1996, United acquired Metra Health. At that time, United required its employees to sign a document acknowledging their receipt of the United Healthcare Corporation Employee Handbook (the Handbook). The Handbook included an arbitration policy, as follows:

“A. Statement of Intent

“. . . [United] believes that the resolution of [employment-related] disagreements [is] best accomplished by…

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.