Arbitration Agreement Limited to Employment Claims Survives ‘Unconscionability’ Attack
On June 23, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Cocom rejected a plaintiff-appellee’s argument that an employment arbitration agreement was unconscionable. Because the agreement’s scope was limited to employment-related claims, rather than all potential claims, the court ruled it was not unconscionable. The court’s decision is a key win for employers and limits several recent California state court cases that had found arbitration agreements unenforceable due to their scope and wording.