ROBERT C. CURTIS v. CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a
VERIZON WIRELESS A-1843-08T3 4/15/10
In this matter, we examined whether plaintiff's claims
under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (CFA), N.J.S.A. 56:8-1
to -106, fell within the scope of the arbitration clause of the
parties' consumer services agreement. In Gras v. Assoc. First
Capital Corp., 346 N.J. Super. 42, 52-54, (App. Div. 2001),
certif. denied, 171 N.J. 445 (2002), we upheld the court's
dismissal of a CFA action as the parties' agreement required
arbitration of "all statutory claims arising out of the
relationship." Although this wireless telephone service
agreement did not specifically include a waiver of the
consumer's statutory claims, we held its language compelling
arbitration and mandating waiver of a jury trial were succinctly
stated, unambiguous, easily noticeable and sufficiently specific
with regard to the actual terms and manner of arbitration,
explicitly informing the consumer that resolution of disputes
would be in an arbitral forum. Rejecting plaintiff's secopoint, we held the contracts use of "∞" was not unconscionable.
