Skip to main content
· 6/30/2008

Ontiveros v. DHL Express (USA), Inc.

Citations

  • 164 Cal. App. 4th 494
  • 79 Cal. Rptr. 3d 471
  • 2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 964
  • 103 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1300

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding arbitration agreement substantively unconscionable because it allowed for only one deposition absent a showing of substantial need
  • substantial need but much less discovery of right than afforded by the CarMax agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kline

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.