Delfingen US-Texas, LP v. Guadalupe Valenzuela

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that unconscionability is a legal question which is reviewed de novo by the appellate court, but the court must defer to the trial court’s fact findings if they are supported by the evidence
• “Standing alone, Valenzuela’s illiteracy in English is insufficient to establish that the Agreement is unconscionable.”
• “The grounds for substantive abuse must be sufficiently shocking or gross to compel the court to intercede.”
• “The court could have also believed Valenzuela’s testimony that Guzman told her the Arbitration Agreement was the company’s policies, such as the attendance policy.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).