• Corpus ID: 12053327

Understanding Unconscionability: Defining the Principle

@article{Fort1978UnderstandingUD,
  title={Understanding Unconscionability: Defining the Principle},
  author={Jeff Fort},
  journal={Loyola University of Chicago Law Journal},
  year={1978},
  volume={9},
  pages={765}
}
  • J. Fort
  • Published 1978
  • Philosophy
  • Loyola University of Chicago Law Journal
The Unconscionability Doctrine in U.S. Contract Law
Unconscionability is a contract defense typically advanced in cases in which there is a combination of unfair contract terms and deficient bargaining. Its origin is primarily in equity as practiced
Freedom of contract, bargaining power & forum selection in bills of lading
The ability of the parties to conclude binding agreements, and to determine the contents of these agreements, is at the very core of our market system. They are the consequence of our liberal
Unconscionable Bargains: What are the Courts Doing?
At its most basic level, the jurisdiction setting aside unconscionable bargains seeks to prevent undue contractual advantage-taking of the “weak” by the “strong". Thus, the elderly, the sick, the

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 13 REFERENCES
Corp. & McGee, 27 Ill. App. 3d 421, 326 N.E.2d 518
  • Corp. & McGee, 27 Ill. App. 3d 421, 326 N.E.2d 518
  • 1975
Kleven v. Geigy Agricultural Chem., 303 Minn. 320 227 N.W.2d
  • Kleven v. Geigy Agricultural Chem., 303 Minn. 320 227 N.W.2d
  • 1972
See King v. South Jersey Nat'l Bank, 66 N
  • 46 Ohio Misc. 37, 347 N.E.2d 561 State Bank v. Hickey, 29 App. Div. 2d 993, 288 N.Y.S.2d 980
  • 1968
Cal. Rptr
  • Cal. Rptr
  • 1975
Cf., Collins v. Uniroyal, Inc
  • Cf., Collins v. Uniroyal, Inc
  • 1970
Clair Motors, 44 Ill. App. 2d 318
  • Clair Motors, 44 Ill. App. 2d 318
  • 1965
Abel Holding Co. v. Am. Dist. Tel. Co., 138 N Thus, there appears a different standard for "knaves" and "fools," respectively. losses too may be held unconscionable
  • J. Super
  • 1974
citing 5 S. WLiSTON, CONTRACTS § 1618 for the proposition that there is no broad doctrine foreholding a person from taking advantage of the adversity of another to drive a hard bargain
  • Cal. Rptr
  • 1961
Civ. Ct. 1972), aff'd on other grounds, 79 Misc
  • 213. Seabrook v. Commuter Housing Co., Inc., 72 Misc. 2d 6, 338 N.Y.S.2d 67 214. Weideman v. Tomaselli, 81 Misc. 2d 828, 365 N.Y.S.2d 681 (County Ct. 1975). 215. Educational Beneficial, Inc. v. Reynolds, 67 Misc. 739, 324 N.Y.S.2d 813 (Civ. Ct. 1971). 216. Billings v. Joseph Harris Co., 27 N.C. App.
  • 1965
Commonwealth v. Monumental Properties, Inc., 459 Pa
  • Commonwealth v. Monumental Properties, Inc., 459 Pa
  • 1974
...
...