Larobina v. Altice Media Solutions, LLC

Citations

• 229 Conn. App. 791

Syllabus

The plaintiff consumer appealed from the trial court's judgment for the defendant Internet and telephone service provider holding, inter alia, that the arbitration provision in the parties' agreement may be enforced by the defendant against the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed, inter alia, that the court incorrectly concluded that his request for a declaratory judgment seeking to invalidate the ''infinite arbitration clause'' of the arbitration provision was nonjusticiable. Held: Although the trial court properly concluded that the plaintiff's request for a declaratory judgment seeking to invalidate the infinite arbitration clause of the arbitration provision was nonjusticiable, the court should have dis- missed, rather than denied, that claim because justiciability implicates the court's subject matter jurisdiction. The trial court did not improperly conclude that there was neither fraud nor an absence of mutual assent with regard to the formation of the parties' agreement, as the plaintiff had notice of the arbitration provision in the agreement and a duty to read the agreement, which he did not do. The trial court properly concluded that the arbitration provision was not procedurally unconscionable as applied to the underlying service dispute because the plaintiff presented no evidence of overreaching by the defen- dant, and he retained the ability not to accept or to terminate the agreement if the terms and conditions, including the arbitration provision, were unac- ceptable to him. The trial court properly concluded that the arbitration provision was not substantively unconscionable, as the plaintiff was notified of the existence of the terms and conditions, the arbitration provision was not unreasonably favorable to the defendant, and it contained an opt-out provision and a severability clause. Argued September 16—officially released December 24, 2024