Cohen

Cohen v. DirecTV, Inc.

Good Law
142 Cal. App. 4th 1442·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1480·2006 Daily Journal DAR 12633·48 Cal. Rptr. 3d 813·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8829
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 2006B184630California5,060 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boland, J.

SUMMARY

A subscriber to services offered by a satellite television programming company filed a class action lawsuit against the company, alleging it covertly degraded some of its high definition television transmissions. The company moved to compel arbitration under the arbitration clause in its customer agreement with the subscriber, which prohibited class litigation of claims in arbitration. The trial court denied the motion and the company timely appealed. We affirm the trial court’s order refusing to compel arbitration because the prohibition on class litigation in the arbitration clause is unconscionable and unenforceable.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

DIRECTV, Inc., broadcasts satellite television programming to homes. Phillip Kent Cohen began receiving basic services from DIRECTV in February 1997. With his first bill he received the customer agreement then in effect. Although that agreement contained no arbitration clause, its change of terms clause allowed DIRECTV to unilaterally modify the agreement. Two months later, along with his April 15, 1997 monthly bill, Cohen received an amended customer agreement containing an arbitration clause.

Approximately…

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.