Case Analysis Baker/Osborne
LS311: Business Law - 01
Professor: Toni Starcher
Assignment 2: Case Analysis Baker/Osborne
Case Analysis Baker/Osborne
In this case scenario, Osborne can be sued in court since the arbitration agreement was not obligatory on the homeowners so they could sue the builder. In here the Osborne signed the contract with HBW, and not the homeowners and this is why the arbitration agreement isn’t binding for the homeowners. The arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable since the arbitration agreement wasn’t included I the contract between Osborne and Baker. The arbitration agreement was in a separate document that the buyers weren’t asked to sign at the time the house was bought. When Thomas Baker and the others who bought homes from Osborne Development Corp., they may not have known that there were imperfection and defects on the property they would have to go into arbitration for restitution. The thing here is that Osborne Development Corp. bought the home warranties after they acquire the properties they then went ahead with giving the documents to the new owners. The federal arbitration act which the homebuyers signed and were told to hold on to, will allow the court to acquire all arbitration clauses immediately that are included in the purchase of homes. In here they should have made sure that they were selling the house in good conditions as it was established in the contract with the arbitration court. In here the purchasers can also have the chance to negotiate the terms of the arbitration clause that was written in the contract. All of this would definitely give the homeowners the chance to sue first of all HBW who supposedly made the home warranty and second Osborne Developments who built the house. They can definitely sue him because there was actually a contract with no arbitration clause.
From what I read Baker sued Osborne for breach of warranties, breach of contract and
Professor: Toni Starcher
Assignment 2: Case Analysis Baker/Osborne
Case Analysis Baker/Osborne
In this case scenario, Osborne can be sued in court since the arbitration agreement was not obligatory on the homeowners so they could sue the builder. In here the Osborne signed the contract with HBW, and not the homeowners and this is why the arbitration agreement isn’t binding for the homeowners. The arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable since the arbitration agreement wasn’t included I the contract between Osborne and Baker. The arbitration agreement was in a separate document that the buyers weren’t asked to sign at the time the house was bought. When Thomas Baker and the others who bought homes from Osborne Development Corp., they may not have known that there were imperfection and defects on the property they would have to go into arbitration for restitution. The thing here is that Osborne Development Corp. bought the home warranties after they acquire the properties they then went ahead with giving the documents to the new owners. The federal arbitration act which the homebuyers signed and were told to hold on to, will allow the court to acquire all arbitration clauses immediately that are included in the purchase of homes. In here they should have made sure that they were selling the house in good conditions as it was established in the contract with the arbitration court. In here the purchasers can also have the chance to negotiate the terms of the arbitration clause that was written in the contract. All of this would definitely give the homeowners the chance to sue first of all HBW who supposedly made the home warranty and second Osborne Developments who built the house. They can definitely sue him because there was actually a contract with no arbitration clause.
From what I read Baker sued Osborne for breach of warranties, breach of contract and