Pinnacle Museum Tower Association, Plaintiff and Respondent v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC — Liu, J…

Summary

Justice Liu concurs in the court's judgment and explains that the Davis-Stirling Act authorizes a recorded arbitration provision even though the homeowners association lacked contractual privity with the developer. He further agrees that the provision should be evaluated for substantive unconscionability, rather than under the ordinary property-restriction reasonableness inquiry, and that the statutory recording process defeats the association's procedural-unconscionability challenge. Justice Kennard, dissenting, would have held that the association never consented to arbitration, while Justice Werdegar, concurring, would enforce the clause on narrower statutory and reasonableness grounds.