Chin

Chin v. Advanced Fresh Concepts Franchise Corp.

Good Law
123 Cal. Rptr. 3d 547·194 Cal. App. 4th 704·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 464
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 20, 2011No. B223639California3,911 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Epstein, J.

*707 Opinion

Appellants Advanced Fresh Concepts Franchise Corp. and Advanced Fresh Concepts Corp. (collectively AFC or franchisor) appeal from an order denying their motion to compel arbitration of a lawsuit brought by a franchisee, respondent Htay Htay Chin (Chin or franchisee). AFC contends the arbitrator rather than the trial court must determine the validity of the arbitration provision in the franchise agreement that specifically delegates this task to the arbitrator in a clause. (We will refer to this as the delegation clause.) Chin argues the arbitration provision is unconscionable and hence unenforceable in an adhesion contract such as the one in this case. We conclude that, even if the delegation clause by itself is unconscionable, none of the other terms of the arbitration provision is, rendering moot the question about the delegation clause. Because the trial court erred in finding other terms of the arbitration provision unconscionable, we reverse its order denying the motion to compel arbitration.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

AFC, a California corporation, is a sushi franchisor. Chin was a franchisee operating food service counters in Missouri under a 2002…

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.