It’s not uncommon for couples contemplating marriage – especially if they have children from previous relationships – to sign premarital agreements concerning the disposition of their individual and joint assets in the event of death or divorce. But as with any legal document, the parties to the agreement are expected to read it and ensure they understand its terms before signing.

The goal of arbitration is to provide a faster, less costly, and more private alternative to litigation in a courtroom. In exchange for these advantages, the parties agree in advance that they will share the costs of the arbitration proceedings and will be bound by its results. But what happens if, between the time the agreement is signed and when a dispute later arises, one of parties suffers a financial reversal and cannot afford to pay its share of the arbitration fees and costs?

When you sign a contract, you expect to be bound by its terms. But what happens when several contracts all relate to one transaction, and they differ slightly in some details – for example, on whether disputes are subject to arbitration?

It’s not unusual for a potential beneficiary to question the wording of a will or trust, claiming that the document doesn’t mean what it says. But it is much less common for the person questioning the wording to be the person who created the document.

When you are asking a court to deprive someone of a fundamental constitutional right, saying that you “believe” the person “likely” agreed to that surrender isn’t a very persuasive argument.

When Mom has dementia and her daughter, as her authorized representative, is handling her health care decisions, does the daughter have the power to sign a residential care facility’s arbitration clause on Mom’s behalf?