In In re FirstMerit Bank, N.A., 52 S.W.3d 749, 757, 44 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 900 (Tex. 2001), the parties resisting arbitration (Pete and Janie de los Santos) contended that the arbitration clause was unconscionable because the arbitration might subject them to substantial costs and fees. FirstMerit Bank, 52 S.W.3d at 755. In support, the de los Santoses testified, in two sworn affidavits, that AAA charged a "minimum $ 2,000 filing fee and a $ 250/day/party hearing fee, along with several other unspecified fees, for hearings before a three-member panel." Id. at 756. Nonetheless, the Texas Supreme Court refused to determine whether these costs were excessive because the de los Santoses presented "no evidence that AAA would actually conduct the arbitration or charge the specified fees." Id. The arbitration clause did not require AAA to conduct the arbitration, and it made no mention of costs. Id. Therefore, the Court held that there was legally insufficient evidence that the plaintiffs would be denied access to arbitration based on excessive costs. Id.