Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
16 California opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Beynon v. Garden Grove Medical Groupgreen2 sentences2024Opinion of the Court by Corrigan, J. prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement — particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract.” (Id. at pp. 123−124.) Second, “the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme.” (Id. at p. 124.) We stated that the “overarching inquiry is whether ‘ “the interests of justice . . . would be furthered” ’ by severance.” (Id. at p. 124, quoting Benyon v. Garden Grove Medical Gr 2006In Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. [(2000)] 24 Cal.4th [83] at page 123 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 745 , 6 P.3d 669 ], the California Supreme Court set forth two reasons for severing illegal terms rather than voiding an entire contract: `The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so woul | 2 | 4 |
Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.green2 sentences2025(Armendariz, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 122 .) “[T]he doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. [Citations.] The overarching inquiry is whether ‘ “the interests of justice . . . would be furthered” ’ by severance.” (Armendariz, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 124 .) We agree with Weisfeiler that the lack of mutuality pervades the entire agreement. 2025(Armendariz, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 122 .) “[T]he doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. [Citations.] The overarching inquiry is whether ‘ “the interests of justice . . . would be furthered” ’ by severance.” (Armendariz, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 124 .) We agree with Weisfeiler that the lack of mutuality pervades the entire agreement. | 1 | 11 |
Marathon Entertainment, Inc. v. Blasigreen2 sentences2011The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. [Citations.] The overarching inquiry is whether ‘ “the interests of justice . . . would be furthered” ’ by severance. [Citation.]” (Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 123- 2010The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement— particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. [Citations.] The overarching inquiry is whether ‘ “the interests of justice . . . would be furthered” ’ by severance.” (Armendariz, at pp. 123-124; accord, Marathon , at p. 996.) Applying these principles, the Mara | 1 | 3 |
Saika v. Goldgreen2 sentences2006In Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. [(2000)] 24 Cal.4th [83] at page 123 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 745 , 6 P.3d 669 ], the California Supreme Court set forth two reasons for severing illegal terms rather than voiding an entire contract: `The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so woul 2000(See Keene, supra, 61 Cal.2d at pp. 320-321, 38 Cal. Rptr. 513 , 392 P.2d 273 ; Birbrower, supra, 17 Cal.4th at pp. 137-139, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 304 , 949 P.2d 1 ; Saika, supra, 49 Cal. App.4th at p. 1082 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 922 [enforcing arbitration agreement already performed, while severing illegal trial de novo clause].) Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. | 1 | 2 |
Lhotka v. Geographic Expeditions, Inc.green1 sentence2021Comm. Comments, n. 2; see also Lhotka v. Geographic Expeditions, Inc. (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 816, 826 [“The trial court has discretion under [Civil Code section 1670.5, subdivision (a)] to refuse to enforce an entire agreement if the agreement is ‘permeated’ by unconscionability.”].) 4 Two policies support severing a contract’s illegal provision rather than voiding the entire contract: “The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the | 1 | 1 |
Parsons v. Bristol Development Co.green2 sentences2009(Parsons v. Bristol Development Co. (1965) 62 Cal.2d 861, 865 [ 44 Cal.Rptr. 767 , 402 P.2d 839 ].) Armendariz stated that two reasons for severing or restricting illegal terms rather than voiding the entire contract are “first ... to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal sche 2009(Parsons v. Bristol Development Co. (1965) 62 Cal.2d 861, 865 [ 44 Cal.Rptr. 767 , 402 P.2d 839 ].) Armendariz stated that two reasons for severing or restricting illegal terms rather than voiding the entire contract are “first ... to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal sche | 1 | 1 |
General Paint Corp. v. Seymourgreen1 sentence2000(See e.g., Werner v. Knoll, supra, 89 Cal.App.2d at pp. 476-77, 201 P.2d 45 ; General Paint Corp. v. Seymour, supra, 124 Cal.App. at pp. 614-615, 12 P.2d 990 .) The overarching inquiry is whether "`the interests of justice ... would be furthered'" by severance. ( Beynon v. Garden Grove Medical Group (1980) 100 Cal.App.3d 698, 713 , 161 Cal.Rptr. 146 .) Moreover, courts must have the capacity to cure the unlawful contract through severance or restriction of the offending clause, which, as discussed below, is not invariably the case. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
MKB Management, Inc. v. Melikian
green
1 sentence2015The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. [Citations.] The overarching inquiry is whether “‘the interests of justice . . . would be furthered’” by severance. [Citation.]’ [Citation.]” (MKB Management, supra, 184 Cal.App.4th at pp. 803-804.) Applied here, we | 1 | 2015–2015 |
At&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion
green
2 sentences2011The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. [Citations.] The overarching inquiry is whether ‘ “the interests of justice . . . would be furthered” ’ by severance. [Citation.]” (Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 123- 2011The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. [Citations.] The overarching inquiry is whether ‘ “the interests of justice . . . would be furthered” ’ by severance. [Citation.]” (Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 123- | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Graham v. Scissor-Tail, Inc.
green
1 sentence2009(Scissor-Tail, supra, 28 Cal.3d at p. 813 .) Scissor-Tail concluded that this provision was unconscionable because the arbitrator was likely to be biased in favor of that party. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority v. CC Partners
green
2 sentences2006In Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. [(2000)] 24 Cal.4th [83] at page 123 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 745 , 6 P.3d 669 ], the California Supreme Court set forth two reasons for severing illegal terms rather than voiding an entire contract: `The first is to prevent parties from gaining undeserved benefit or suffering undeserved detriment as a result of voiding the entire agreement—particularly when there has been full or partial performance of the contract. [Citations.] Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so woul 2006Failing to do so would result in CC Partners' gaining an undeserved benefit, would ignore the parties' intent that the remainder *206 of their agreement remain unaffected by the invalidity of any particular provision, and would ill serve the interest of justice and the policy of this state to encourage arbitration of disputes. ( Id. at p. 647, 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 363 .) Similarly, in Kyocera, supra, 341 F.3d 987 , the Court of Appeals, applying California state law, considered whether the invalidity of the provision regarding an expanded standard of review rendered the entire arbitration clause un | 1 | 2006–2006 |
cluster 783379
green
2 sentences2006Failing to do so would result in CC Partners' gaining an undeserved benefit, would ignore the parties' intent that the remainder *206 of their agreement remain unaffected by the invalidity of any particular provision, and would ill serve the interest of justice and the policy of this state to encourage arbitration of disputes. ( Id. at p. 647, 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 363 .) Similarly, in Kyocera, supra, 341 F.3d 987 , the Court of Appeals, applying California state law, considered whether the invalidity of the provision regarding an expanded standard of review rendered the entire arbitration clause un 2006Failing to do so would result in CC Partners' gaining an undeserved benefit, would ignore the parties' intent that the remainder *206 of their agreement remain unaffected by the invalidity of any particular provision, and would ill serve the interest of justice and the policy of this state to encourage arbitration of disputes. ( Id. at p. 647, 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 363 .) Similarly, in Kyocera, supra, 341 F.3d 987 , the Court of Appeals, applying California state law, considered whether the invalidity of the provision regarding an expanded standard of review rendered the entire arbitration clause un | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Little v. Auto Stiegler, Inc.
green
2 sentences2006Failing to do so would result in CC Partners' gaining an undeserved benefit, would ignore the parties' intent that the remainder *206 of their agreement remain unaffected by the invalidity of any particular provision, and would ill serve the interest of justice and the policy of this state to encourage arbitration of disputes. ( Id. at p. 647, 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 363 .) Similarly, in Kyocera, supra, 341 F.3d 987 , the Court of Appeals, applying California state law, considered whether the invalidity of the provision regarding an expanded standard of review rendered the entire arbitration clause un 2006Failing to do so would result in CC Partners' gaining an undeserved benefit, would ignore the parties' intent that the remainder *206 of their agreement remain unaffected by the invalidity of any particular provision, and would ill serve the interest of justice and the policy of this state to encourage arbitration of disputes. ( Id. at p. 647, 124 Cal.Rptr.2d 363 .) Similarly, in Kyocera, supra, 341 F.3d 987 , the Court of Appeals, applying California state law, considered whether the invalidity of the provision regarding an expanded standard of review rendered the entire arbitration clause un | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Werner v. Knoll
green
1 sentence2000(See e.g., Werner v. Knoll, supra, 89 Cal.App.2d at pp. 476-77, 201 P.2d 45 ; General Paint Corp. v. Seymour, supra, 124 Cal.App. at pp. 614-615, 12 P.2d 990 .) The overarching inquiry is whether "`the interests of justice ... would be furthered'" by severance. ( Beynon v. Garden Grove Medical Group (1980) 100 Cal.App.3d 698, 713 , 161 Cal.Rptr. 146 .) Moreover, courts must have the capacity to cure the unlawful contract through severance or restriction of the offending clause, which, as discussed below, is not invariably the case. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Birbrower, Montalbano, Condon & Frank v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2000(See Keene, supra, 61 Cal.2d at pp. 320-321, 38 Cal. Rptr. 513 , 392 P.2d 273 ; Birbrower, supra, 17 Cal.4th at pp. 137-139, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 304 , 949 P.2d 1 ; Saika, supra, 49 Cal. App.4th at p. 1082 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 922 [enforcing arbitration agreement already performed, while severing illegal trial de novo clause].) Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. 2000(See Keene, supra, 61 Cal.2d at pp. 320-321, 38 Cal. Rptr. 513 , 392 P.2d 273 ; Birbrower, supra, 17 Cal.4th at pp. 137-139, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 304 , 949 P.2d 1 ; Saika, supra, 49 Cal. App.4th at p. 1082 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 922 [enforcing arbitration agreement already performed, while severing illegal trial de novo clause].) Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Keene v. Harling
green
2 sentences2000(See Keene, supra, 61 Cal.2d at pp. 320-321, 38 Cal. Rptr. 513 , 392 P.2d 273 ; Birbrower, supra, 17 Cal.4th at pp. 137-139, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 304 , 949 P.2d 1 ; Saika, supra, 49 Cal. App.4th at p. 1082 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 922 [enforcing arbitration agreement already performed, while severing illegal trial de novo clause].) Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. 2000(See Keene, supra, 61 Cal.2d at pp. 320-321, 38 Cal. Rptr. 513 , 392 P.2d 273 ; Birbrower, supra, 17 Cal.4th at pp. 137-139, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 304 , 949 P.2d 1 ; Saika, supra, 49 Cal. App.4th at p. 1082 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 922 [enforcing arbitration agreement already performed, while severing illegal trial de novo clause].) Second, more generally, the doctrine of severance attempts to conserve a contractual relationship if to do so would not be condoning an illegal scheme. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.