On January 16, 1974, petitioner and respondent signed a contract whereby the petitioner agreed to employ the respondent as his agent for a period of three years. The contract is a standard form used and approved by the conference of personal managers in the entertainment industry. It contains an arbitration clause that provides: "In the event of any dispute under or relating to the terms of this agreement, or the breach, validity or legality thereof, it is agreed that the same shall be submitted to arbitration." In addition to the standard features the contract contains a rider giving the respondent the option to extend the agreement for four more years.
When the petitioner signed these agreements he was 19 years old and thus, according to the law in effect at that time, he was legally an infant. The court held that arbitration was the proper way to handle the dispute.
1. Did the court rule that the entire contract was valid? Could one provision in the contract be valid and enforceable while the rest of the contract is not valid?
2. What is the New York court's general attitude toward arbitration?