Bigler

Bigler v. Harker School

Good Law
153 Cal. Rptr. 3d 78·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 91·213 Cal. App. 4th 727·2013 WL 441747
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 2013No. H037450California5,273 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Elia, J.

The Harker School (Harker) and one of its teachers, Peter Itokazu, appeal from an order denying their petition to compel arbitration of contract and tort claims brought by plaintiff Shivani Bigler, a student at the school. 1 Defendants contest the superior court’s conclusion that a broad arbitration provision in the enrollment contract signed by Shivani’s parents is unconscionable and therefore unenforceable. They further challenge the court’s finding that the contracting parties would not have reasonably expected the tort allegations of the complaint to be included in the arbitration process. Having independently considered these issues in light of the record, we agree with Harker that the arbitration provision is valid and applicable to the tort allegations.

Background

Shivani was enrolled at Harker from 1999 until April 27, 2011. Each year her parents were presented with an enrollment contract for the following school year. In January 2010, the head of school enclosed a letter along with the proposed contract for the 2010-2011 school year. In the letter sent to the Biglers, he asked them to return the contract with their deposit by February 10, 2010, in order to…

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.