# Moran v. Riverfront Diversified, Inc.

> Ohio Court of Appeals · December 9, 2011 · 197 Ohio App. 3d 471

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802215

## Case

- **Full name:** MORAN, Appellee, v. RIVERFRONT DIVERSIFIED, INC., D.B.A. Everdry Waterproofing, Appellant
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** December 9, 2011
- **Citations:** 197 Ohio App. 3d 471; 968 N.E.2d 1; 2011 Ohio 6328
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Froelich
- **Judges:** Hall, Donovan, Froelich
- **Cited by:** 10 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802215

## Opinion text

Froelich, Judge,
concurring in judgment.
{¶ 35} I concur in the judgment. Although Ohio law favors arbitration, I am just not as sure, especially prior to the evidentiary hearing required by our remand, that there is no procedural or substantive unconscionability in the relationship between this buyer and this seller.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9802215. Public record. Not legal advice.