In amp, the North Carolina Supreme Court decides a case called Smith v. juries. Smith v. juries holds that any adhesion agreement that burdens any person's right to appellate review is substantively unconscionable. In aoao, Anita begins a new cell phone wireless contract with Verizon. The agreement she signs provides that, in exchange for so per months for 24 months, 11.!'eriaon will provide her with unlimited calls, texts, and data; the agreement makes no mention of data speed throttling. The agreement also includes this provision: Any dispute arising under or related to this Agreement shall be re- solved by arbitration in accordance with the arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association. The results of such arbitration shall be binding, nal, and not subject to any trther review, judi- cial or otherwise. After six months, Anita becomes convinced that Verizon is throttling her data speed. She les a lawsuit in North Carolina district court against Veri- aon, alleging breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, and unfair and deceptive trade practices. Verizon responds with a motion to compel arbitration. You're the district judge in this case. Verizon's motion is ripe for adjudica- tion. 1Which way do you rule? Explain why. ifyou need more information, say so and explain how that information would inuence your analysis