Bell & Co. v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a mandatory fee shifting provision in an employment agreement is unconscionable under a similar statute because it was “a significant deterrent to employees contemplating initiating an action to vindicate their rights”
• holding that a mandatory fee shifting provision in an employment agreement is unconscionable under a similar statute because it was \a significant deterrent to employees contemplating initiating an action to vindicate their rights\
• finding that an arbitration agreement lacked procedural oppression where the agreement “was in the same typeface, font, and size as the rest of the [contract] and had a bold, underlined heading labeled ‘Mandatory Arbitration’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).