Court Sends Dispute Over 138% Consumer Loan to Tribal Nation Arbitration

A federal court in Florida recently enforced an arbitration agreement in a consumer loan with a whopping annual interest rate of 138%. Inetianbor v. CashCall, Inc., No. 13-60066-CIV (S.D. Fla. May 17, 2013).  (Click on the following link for a copy of the decision: cashcall case.)  The arbitration agreement provided that all disputes “be resolved by Arbitration, which shall be conducted by the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation by an authorized representative in accordance with its consumer dispute rules and the terms of this Agreement.”  Also, according to motions filed in the case, the arbitrator must apply the laws of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation.   The court rejected unconscionability arguments regarding the arbitration agreement, and the court also found that there is a strong presumption in favor of enforcing choice-of-law provisions.

There may be other examples out there, but I have never before noticed a consumer contract selecting a Native American tribal court to administer consumer arbitration.  Is anyone aware of other examples?  I tried to look up the company involved in the dispute, and the company’s website (click here) describes the company as a “Native-American-owned business,” which helps explain the choice of forum.