CLAIMS OF UNCONSCIONABILITY: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE PREVAILING ANALYSIS IN NORTH CAROLINA

Many people, based on the intrinsic notion of fairness, believe that the law will not enforce a contract that is unreasonable. Unconscionability has been used as a theory to void contract provisions since the first courts of equity; however, since this theory's incorporation into the Uniform Co...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Wake Forest law review 2014-07, Vol.49 (2), p.633
Main Authors: Becker, Brett M, Sechrist, John R
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Contract law
Provisions
State court decisions
Uniform Commercial Code-US
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Many people, based on the intrinsic notion of fairness, believe that the law will not enforce a contract that is unreasonable. Unconscionability has been used as a theory to void contract provisions since the first courts of equity; however, since this theory's incorporation into the Uniform Commercial Code ("U.C.C."), it has taken a more prominent role in contract law. Unconscionability, however, does not have a clear definition, and scholars have noted that the application of unconscionability and the expectations of many people often do not align. Therefore, this Study seeks to investigate unconscionability and attempts discover how the doctrine is applied and how claims of unconscionability are analyzed. This Study examines the doctrine of unconscionability in North Carolina empirically through the use of court cases. The purpose of this Study is to observe the significance of preselected factors in the outcomes of cases.
ISSN:0043-003X