Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton (2000)
green
· 39 citation events
across 7 courts.
Showing the 13 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
200020132026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna (2006)
Respondents appealed, and the Florida Supreme Court reversed, reasoning that to enforce an agreement to arbitrate in a contract challenged as unlawful "`could breathe life into a contract that not only violates state law, but also is criminal in nature . . . .'" 894 So. 2d 860, 862 (2005) (quoting Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton , 751 So. 2d 121, 123 (Fla. App. 2000)).
green
Cardegna v. Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. (2005)
See 751 So.2d at 123 ("The issue here ... is whether a contract that violates state law and is criminal in nature, can be referred to arbitration."). [2] The court expressed the unwarranted fear that without a court determination of the legality of the now-presumptively illegal contract, the court "could breathe life" into an illegal contract by sending the case to arbitration. 751 So.2d at 123 .
"The issue here ... is whether a contract that violates state law and is criminal in nature, can be referred to arbitration."
green
Wright v. City of Gary (2012)
App.2011), reh'g denied (Nov. 10, 2011) ("If the contract is found to be illegal, a prior arbitration will not prevent the trial court from vacating the award."); Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121, 123 (Fla. Dist.Ct.App.2000) ("A claim that a contract is illegal ... is not a matter which can be determined by an arbitrator.
green
Nature's 10 Jewelers v. Gunderson (2002)
An arbitrator cannot order a party to perform an illegal act." 751 So.2d 121, 123 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2000).
green
Ayanna Wright and American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 62, Local 4009, AFL-… (2012)
Ct. App. 2011), reh’g denied (Nov. 10, 2011) (“If the contract is found to be illegal, a prior arbitration will not prevent the trial court from vacating the award.”); Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So. 2d 121, 123 (Fla. Dist.
“A claim that a contract is illegal … is not a matter which can be determined by an arbitrator. An arbitrator cannot order a party to perform an illegal act.”
green
Jmc v. Vna (2011)
See Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) ("A claim that a contract is illegal and, as in this case, criminal in nature, is not a matter which can be determined by an arbitrator.
"A claim that a contract is illegal and, as in this case, criminal in nature, is not a matter which can be determined by an arbitrator. An arbitrator cannot order a party to perform an illegal act."
See Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (“A claim that a contract is illegal and, as in this case, criminal in nature, is not a matter which can be determined by an arbitrator.
“A claim that a contract is illegal and, as in this case, criminal in nature, is not a matter which can be determined by an arbitrator. An arbitrator cannot order a party to perform an illegal act.”
green
Austin v. Alabama Check Cashers Ass'n (2005)
See Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121 , 122 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) ('In usury cases, courts look to substance over form because the purpose of usury statute is to protect the needy borrower by penalizing the unconscionable lender.')." 879 So.2d at 672 .
'In usury cases, courts look to substance over form because the purpose of usury statute is to protect the needy borrower by penalizing the unconscionable lender.'
green
Betts v. McKenzie Check Advance of Florida, LLC (2004)
See Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121, 122 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) ("In usury cases, courts look to substance over form because the purpose of usury statute is to protect the needy borrower by penalizing the unconscionable lender.").
"In usury cases, courts look to substance over form because the purpose of usury statute is to protect the needy borrower by penalizing the unconscionable lender."
green
Oregrund Ltd. Partnership v. Sheive (2004)
Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Kraft v. Mason, 668 So.2d 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Bermil Corp. v. Sawyer, 353 So.2d 579 (Fla. *457 3d DCA 1978).
See Cardegna, 894 So.2d at 862 (quoting Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (indicating a concern with submitting a claim that a contract is void for illegality to arbitration because it “could breathe life into a contract that not only violates state law, but also is criminal in nature”)).
indicating a concern with submitting a claim that a contract is void for illegality to arbitration because it “could breathe life into a contract that not only violates state law, but also is criminal in nature”
See Cardegna, 894 So. 2d at 862 (quoting Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So. 2d 121, 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (indicating a concern with submitting a claim that a contract is void for illegality to arbitration because it “could breathe life into a contract that not only violates state law, but also is criminal in nature”)).
indicating a concern with submitting a claim that a contract is void for illegality to arbitration because it “could breathe life into a contract that not only violates state law, but also is criminal in nature”
green
RIVERWALK APART. v. RTM Gen. Contractors, Inc. (2000)
See Party Yards, Inc. v. Templeton, 751 So.2d 121 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Alphagraphics Franchising, Inc. v. Stebbins, 617 So.2d 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).