, Inc.v. McIllwain, 2013 WL 5497717 (Ark. 2013)

Holding: Private Claim that LegalZoom engaged in the Unauthorized Practice of Law is Subject to Arbitration.

On October 3, 2013, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that an unfair trade practice claim by a consumer who purchased a will from LegalZoom’s website was subject to arbitration.  The court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the arbitration clause was unconscionable because state courts had exclusive authority to regulate the practice of law.  The court held that the plaintiff’s claim went to the contract as a whole rather than the arbitration clause in particular.  Of course, as the opinion indicates, state regulators would not be subject to the arbitration clause and could take action against LegalZoom.


Full text available at:…

Open pdf