Emerald Texas, Inc. v. Peel

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[t]here is no requirement that a separate identifiable consideration be segregated and attributable to the arbitration provision; it was part of the entire bundle of rights the Peels acquired, along with the house”
• finding no evidence to support the contention that an arbitration agreement in an earnest money contract was unconscionable
• A [A]n arbitration clause does not require mutuality of obligation, so long as the underlying contract is supported by adequate consideration. @

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).