...being challenged? According to the 2006 Supreme Court case of Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, an arbitrator must decide the legality of a contract, unless the arbitration clause itself is being challenged.
Does that apply if the very entering into the contract, much less the validity of it, is being challenged?
Cardegna stated that the entire contract she signed, including the arbitration clause, is unenforceable because it violated Florida's usury laws.
I'm talking about denying that there was a contract to begin with.
JUDGE: Is this your signature?
DEFENDANT: No, Your Honor, that is not my signature. That signature is forged!
For example, if the defendant claims that his identity was stolen when this loan was taken out, and that wasn't his signature, at all, would the judge still force the debtor to go to arbitration?
Does that apply if the very entering into the contract, much less the validity of it, is being challenged?
Cardegna stated that the entire contract she signed, including the arbitration clause, is unenforceable because it violated Florida's usury laws.
I'm talking about denying that there was a contract to begin with.
JUDGE: Is this your signature?
DEFENDANT: No, Your Honor, that is not my signature. That signature is forged!
For example, if the defendant claims that his identity was stolen when this loan was taken out, and that wasn't his signature, at all, would the judge still force the debtor to go to arbitration?