well-supported claim in Texas

2024See APC Home Health Services, Inc. v. Martinez, 600 S.W.3d 381 , 395 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2019, no pet.) (recognizing that “unequal bargaining power does not establish grounds for invalidating an arbitration agreement absent a well-supported claim that the agreement resulted from the sort of fraud or overwhelming economic power that would provide grounds for revocation of any contract”); see also In re McKinney, 167 S.W.3d 833, 835 (Tex. 2005) (per curiam) (“Absent fraud, misrepresentation, or deceit, a party is bound by the terms of the contract he signed, regardless of whether he read it or th

2023See APC Home Health Services, Inc. v. Martinez, 600 S.W.3d 381 , 395 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2019, no pet.) (recognizing that “unequal bargaining power does not establish grounds for invalidating an arbitration agreement absent a well-supported claim that the agreement resulted from the sort of fraud or overwhelming economic power that would provide grounds for revocation of any contract”); see also In re McKinney, 167 S.W.3d 833, 835 (Tex. 2005) (per curiam) (“Absent fraud, misrepresentation, or deceit, a party is bound by the terms of the contract he signed, regardless of whether he read it or th

2019Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 33 (1991) (“Mere inequality in bargaining power, however, is not a sufficient reason to hold that arbitration agreements are never enforceable in the employment context.”); In re Halliburton Co., 80 S.W.3d at 572 (holding an arbitration agreement was not unconscionable simply because an employer made a “take it or leave it” offer to its at-will employees).

2017Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 33 , 111 S.Ct. 1647, 1655 , 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991)(“Mere inequality in bargaining power, however, is not a sufficient reason to hold that arbitration agreements are never enforceable in the employment context.”); In re Halliburton Co., 80 S.W.3d 566, 572 (Tex. 2002)(holding an arbitration agreement was not unconscionable simply because an employer may make a “take it or leave it” offer to its at-will employees).

2019Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 33 (1991) (“Mere inequality in bargaining power, however, is not a sufficient reason to hold that arbitration agreements are never enforceable in the employment context.”); In re Halliburton Co., 80 S.W.3d at 572 (holding an arbitration agreement was not unconscionable simply because an employer made a “take it or leave it” offer to its at-will employees).

2017Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 33 , 111 S.Ct. 1647, 1655 , 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991)(“Mere inequality in bargaining power, however, is not a sufficient reason to hold that arbitration agreements are never enforceable in the employment context.”); In re Halliburton Co., 80 S.W.3d 566, 572 (Tex. 2002)(holding an arbitration agreement was not unconscionable simply because an employer may make a “take it or leave it” offer to its at-will employees).

2019Sr. 125, 155 (1751), quoted in Venture Cotton Cooperative v. Freeman, 435 S.W.3d 222, 228 (Tex. 2014). 16 establish grounds for invalidating an arbitration agreement absent a well-supported claim that the agreement resulted from the sort of fraud or overwhelming economic power that would provide grounds for revocation of any contract.

2005Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20, 33 , 111 S.Ct. 1647 , 114 L.Ed.2d 26 (1991); EZ Pawn Corp. v. Mandas, 934 S.W.2d 87, 90-91 (Tex.1996) (per curiam). 7 Third, the pharmacies contend the arbitration clause was disclosed only after they had joined PCS.