Court Opinion

ID: 9934889
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:54:54.097066+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:26:45.835650
License: Public Domain

In view of the result reached on rehearing, I concur.
The main opinion states: "[W]e hold that, in a case involving a contract of adhesion, if it is not shown that the party in an inferior bargaining position had a meaningful choice of agreeing to arbitration or not, and if the superior party has reserved to itself the choice of arbitration or litigation, a court may deny the superior party's motion to compel arbitration based on the doctrines of mutuality of remedy and unconscionability." 694 So.2d at 1338.
I must point out, however, that the question the main opinion was addressing when it said this — whether a so-called contract of adhesion can be enforced so as to compel arbitration — is not presented in this case. In my opinion, the statements in the main opinion on that question are dicta. Because of this, I concur in the result only.
SEE, J., concurs.