Barr v. Yamhill County

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that special arbitration conditions imposed by state law, such as bold notice provisions, are preempted by federal law
• holding that special arbitration conditions imposed by state law, such as bold notice provisions, are preempted by federal law
• holding that California Business & Professions Code § 20040.05 does not apply to “any contract” because it “applies only to forum selection SAKKAB V. LUXOTTICA RETAIL N. AM. 15 clauses and only to franchise agreements”
• emphasizing that in Laxmi, “the forum selection clause in that franchise agreement was unenforceable because the parties never clearly agreed on the venue in which arbitration was to take place”
• insulating from preemption only state law rules that are “generally applicable” or apply to “any contract”
• California statute preempted because it applies only to forum-selection clauses and only to franchise agreements, and therefore it does not apply to “any contract”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).