Court Opinion

ID: 9862725
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 01:59:58.539589+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:31:10.036176
License: Public Domain

Justice RIVERA-SOTO,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
To the extent the majority holds that the arbitration agreements in this case are enforceable, ante, 189 N.J. at 26, 912 A.2d at 103 (2006), I concur. However, to the extent the majority holds that the class-arbitration waivers in plaintiffs arbitration agreements are unconscionable, ante, 189 N.J. at 22, 912 A.2d at 100-01 (2006), I respectfully dissent for the reasons thoughtfully and exhaustively set forth by both the Appellate Division, Muhammad v. County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Del., 379 N.J.Super. 222, 877 A.2d 340 (App.Div.2005), and the trial court.
For reversal and remandment — Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices LONG, LaVECCHIA, ZAZZALI and WALLACE — 5.
For concurrence in part; dissent in part — Justice RIVERA-SOTO — 1.