Torrance v. Aames Funding Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that confidentiality provision affected so many persons that it would put lender in “vastly superior legal posture”
• holding that confidentiality provision in an arbitration agreement appended to a mortgage contract would give mortgagors “a vastly superior legal posture”
• holding that confidentiality provision affected so many persons that it would put lender in “vastly superior legal posture”
• holding that Oregon law does not require mutual obligations for a contract to be enforceable and an arbitration agreement is not rendered unconscionable simply because the employer is not required to arbitrate all claims
• indicating that foreclosure claims permitted under an arbitration agreement are not unreasonable or oppressive because foreclosures “are heavily regulated by statute,” which promotes efficiency and “effective protections for both sides”
• an arbitration agreement that requires the plaintiff to pay any arbitrator’s fee to vindicate statutory rights is unconscionable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).