Breazeale et al v. Victim Services, Inc. d/b/a CorrectiveSolutions et al

Filing 120

ORDER requesting further briefing. Signed by Hon. Vince Chhabria on 3/22/2016. (vclc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/22/2016)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN BREAZEALE, et al.,

Case No. 14-cv-05266-VC

Plaintiffs,
ORDER REQUESTING FURTHER
BRIEFING

v.
VICTIM SERVICES, INC. D/B/A
CORRECTIVESOLUTIONS, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 92

Defendants.
The Court is of the view that plaintiff Narisha Bonakdar's primary argument in opposition
to defendant Victim Services, Inc.'s motion to compel (namely, that no valid contract was formed
between Ms. Bonakdar and VSI) is without merit. However, the Court requests further briefing
on the question whether the arbitration provision itself is unlawful. Specifically, when the State
uses a private company to assist in the operation of the criminal justice system, is it ever
appropriate for disputes that arise between the private company and citizens who have been
pulled into the criminal justice system to be resolved through arbitration? Would an agreement
to arbitrate disputes of this type be substantively unconscionable under California law? Would
an agreement to arbitrate disputes of this type violate the California Constitution? The United
States Constitution?
Ms. Bonakdar's supplemental brief is due April 6, 2016. VSI's response is due April 13,
2016. The briefs may not exceed 20 pages.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 22, 2016
______________________________________
VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge

2