Opinion ID: 2996471
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Absence of Mutual Assent and Consideration

Text: Appellants argue that they cannot be forced to arbitrate their claims because they did not assent to arbitration, nor did they provide any independent consideration for implementing the clause into their policies. But the addition of the arbitration provision was not an independent contract requiring mutual assent or consideration; rather, it was the policyholders’ insurance contracts that created their obligations. See Geldermann, 836 F.2d at 318-19. And as discussed previously, these contracts explicitly bound Appellants to subsequent changes in AAL’s bylaws. See id. Since these agreements were supported by ample consideration—the policyholders received life insurance coverage and access to other fraternal benefits provided by AAL— the district court correctly concluded that the insurance contracts are not invalid for lack of mutual assent and consideration.