You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Quebedeaux v. SUNSHINE HOMES INC.

Citations: 941 So. 2d 162; 2006 WL 2871994Docket: 06-349

Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; October 11, 2006; Louisiana; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves Royer Mobile Homes of Opelousas, Inc. and Sunshine Homes, Inc., who appealed the trial court's denial of their Dilatory Exceptions of Prematurity, arguing that the plaintiffs' action was subject to arbitration. The plaintiffs, having purchased a mobile home, encountered structural issues and filed a lawsuit for redhibition, breach of contract, and damages. The defendants contended that the case should be arbitrated based on a clause introduced post-agreement. However, the court affirmed that the arbitration clause was unenforceable, as it was added unilaterally without mutual consent after the original purchase agreement. Citing precedents from *Rodriguez v. Ed's Mobile Homes of Bossier City* and *Abshire v. Belmont Homes, Inc.*, the court concluded that the clause was invalid due to lack of consent and error, as the plaintiffs were unaware of this requirement at the time of the initial agreement. Ultimately, the appellate court upheld the trial court's decision, emphasizing that Louisiana's public policy on arbitration requires mutual agreement, and assigned all appeal costs to the defendants.

Legal Issues Addressed

Consent and Error in Contractual Agreements

Application: Consent to the arbitration clause was considered invalid due to error, as the Quebedeauxs were not aware of the arbitration requirement when they signed the original agreement.

Reasoning: Consent may be voided by error, particularly if the error pertains to the main reason for entering the contract and is known or should be known to the other party.

Contractual Terms and Unilateral Modifications

Application: The court held that Royer could not unilaterally impose an arbitration clause after the contract was established, as it altered the original terms agreed upon by both parties.

Reasoning: It emphasized that one party cannot unilaterally impose additional terms after an agreement has been reached.

Enforceability of Arbitration Clauses

Application: The arbitration clause was deemed unenforceable as it was unilaterally imposed after the initial purchase agreement was completed and lacked mutual consent.

Reasoning: The court affirmed that the parties had pre-established the terms of the contract of sale, which did not include a binding arbitration clause.

Public Policy on Arbitration

Application: Louisiana's public policy supports arbitration, but such provisions are only enforceable if mutually agreed upon by all parties involved.

Reasoning: Although Louisiana public policy favors arbitration, not all arbitration provisions are valid under state law.