Family Security Credit Union v. Richard W. Etheredge Family Security Credit Union v. Kendrick M. Nettles Family…

Summary

The Supreme Court of Alabama held that the purchasers' claims against the credit union were subject to binding arbitration under the broad arbitration provisions in their vehicle-financing agreements. The purchasers failed to present evidence of procedural unconscionability, mutuality of remedy was not required, the vehicle-purchase and financing transactions supplied consideration, and the claims arose out of or related to the agreements. The court reversed the orders denying arbitration and remanded all eight cases.