Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
19 New York opinions name it 5 courts 1950–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Belzberg v. Verus Investments Holdings Inc.green2 sentences2020Nevertheless, "[u]nder the direct benefits theory of estoppel, a nonsignatory may be compelled to arbitrate where the nonsignatory knowingly exploits the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause, and receives benefits flowing directly from the agreement" ( id. at 631 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Long Is. 2020Indeed, the letter provided that "only the hard copy report is to be relied upon as [petitioner's] work product," and that if Millennium were to use the report petitioner "would consider [its] consent to the inclusion of [petitioner's] report and the terms thereof at that time." Moreover, "a nonsignatory may be compelled to arbitrate where [it] knowingly exploits' the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause" ( Belzberg, 21 NY3d at 631 [emphasis added]). | 4 | 7 |
Mag Portfolio Consult, Gmbh v. Merlin Biomed Group LLC and Merlin Biomed Advisors LLCgreen2 sentences2018"Under the direct benefits theory of estoppel, a nonsignatory may be compelled to arbitrate where the nonsignatory knowingly exploits' the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause, and receives benefits flowing directly from the agreement" ( id. at 631 ; see MAG Portfolio Consultant, GmbH v Merlin Biomed Group LLC , 268 F3d 58, 61 [2d Cir]). 2013Under the direct benefits theory of estoppel, a nonsignatory may be compelled to arbitrate where the nonsignatory “knowingly exploits” the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause, and receives benefits flowing directly from the agreement (see MAG Portfolio Consultant, GmbH v Merlin Biomed Group LLC, 268 F3d 58, 61 [2d Cir 2001] [“Under the estoppel theory, a company ‘knowingly exploiting (an) agreement (with an arbitration clause can be) estopped from avoiding arbitration despite having never signed the agreement’ ”]; see also Deloitte Noraudit A/S v Deloitte Haskins & Sells, | 3 | 4 |
Sr. Kate Reid v. Doe Run Resources Corp.green2 sentences2017In the arbitration context, the Court of Appeals has adopted "the direct benefits theory of estoppel", pursuant to which a non-signatory is bound by an arbitration agreement where the non-signatory [*9] " 'knowingly exploits' the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause, and receives benefits flowing directly from the agreement ." Belzberg v Verus Investments Holdings Inc. , 21 NY3d 626 , 631 (2013) (emphasis added), citing, e.g., Reid v Doe Run Resources Corp. , 701 F3d 840, 846 (8th Cir 2012) ("Direct benefits estoppel applies when a nonsignatory knowingly exploits the agree 2017In the arbitration context, the Court of Appeals has adopted "the direct benefits theory of estoppel", pursuant to which a non-signatory is bound by an arbitration agreement where the non-signatory [*9] " 'knowingly exploits' the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause, and receives benefits flowing directly from the agreement ." Belzberg v Verus Investments Holdings Inc. , 21 NY3d 626 , 631 (2013) (emphasis added), citing, e.g., Reid v Doe Run Resources Corp. , 701 F3d 840, 846 (8th Cir 2012) ("Direct benefits estoppel applies when a nonsignatory knowingly exploits the agree | 2 | 2 |
Norris v. Coopergreen2 sentences2005With respect to an arbitrator exceeding his power, “New York courts have uniformly held that an arbitrator exceeds his powers only when he ignores specific limitations on the powers delegated to him in the arbitration clause or he gives a completely irrational construction to the provisions of the parties’ agreement, thereby effectively rewriting it” (Integrated Sales, 94 AD2d at 225 ; see also Matter of Silverman, 61 NY2d at 307 [“any limitation upon the power of the arbitrator must be set forth as part of the arbitration clause itself, for to infer a limitation from the substantive provision 2004Indeed, any limitation on an arbitrator’s power “must be set forth as part of the arbitration clause itself, for to infer a limitation from the substantive provisions of an agreement containing an arbitration clause . . . , is to involve the courts in the merits of the dispute—interpretation of the contract’s provisions—in violation of the legislative mandate [citations omitted]” (Matter of Silverman, 61 NY2d at 307 ; see also CPLR 7511 [b] [1]). | 1 | 2 |
Hayes v. Biedermann, Reif, Hoenig & Ruff, P.C.green1 sentence2025Plaintiff relies on Donnkenny Apparel v Lee, 291 AD2d 224, 224-25 (1st Dept 2002) and Hayes v Biedermann, Reif, Hoenig & Ruff, P.C, 94 AD3d 680, 680 (1st Dept 2012) to argue continued employment past the expiration of an employment agreement is insufficient to extend or renew its arbitration clause. | 1 | 1 |
Donnkenny Apparel, Inc. v. Leegreen1 sentence2025Plaintiff relies on Donnkenny Apparel v Lee, 291 AD2d 224, 224-25 (1st Dept 2002) and Hayes v Biedermann, Reif, Hoenig & Ruff, P.C, 94 AD3d 680, 680 (1st Dept 2012) to argue continued employment past the expiration of an employment agreement is insufficient to extend or renew its arbitration clause. | 1 | 1 |
Noble Drilling Services, Inc. v. Certex USA, Inc.green1 sentence2020"To satisfy the knowledge requirement, the case law requires that the non-signatory [] had actual knowledge of the contract containing the arbitration clause" ( Noble Drilling Servs., Inc. v Certex USA, Inc., 620 F3d 469, 473 [5th Cir 2010]). | 1 | 1 |
Deloitte Noraudit A/S v. Deloitte Haskins & Sellsgreen1 sentence2013Under the direct benefits theory of estoppel, a nonsignatory may be compelled to arbitrate where the nonsignatory “knowingly exploits” the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause, and receives benefits flowing directly from the agreement (see MAG Portfolio Consultant, GmbH v Merlin Biomed Group LLC, 268 F3d 58, 61 [2d Cir 2001] [“Under the estoppel theory, a company ‘knowingly exploiting (an) agreement (with an arbitration clause can be) estopped from avoiding arbitration despite having never signed the agreement’ ”]; see also Deloitte Noraudit A/S v Deloitte Haskins & Sells, | 1 | 1 |
Bridas S.A.P.I.C. v. Government of Turkmenistangreen1 sentence2013Under the direct benefits theory of estoppel, a nonsignatory may be compelled to arbitrate where the nonsignatory “knowingly exploits” the benefits of an agreement containing an arbitration clause, and receives benefits flowing directly from the agreement (see MAG Portfolio Consultant, GmbH v Merlin Biomed Group LLC, 268 F3d 58, 61 [2d Cir 2001] [“Under the estoppel theory, a company ‘knowingly exploiting (an) agreement (with an arbitration clause can be) estopped from avoiding arbitration despite having never signed the agreement’ ”]; see also Deloitte Noraudit A/S v Deloitte Haskins & Sells, | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re the Arbitration Between Weinrott & Carp
green
2 sentences2025Pursuant to the First Department, courts must "treat an agreement containing an arbitration clause as if there were two separate agreements-the substantive agreement between the parties, and the agreement to arbitration" (O'Neill v Krebs Communications Corp., 16 AD3d 144 , 144 [1st Dept 2005] citing Matter o.fWeinrott [Carp], 32 NY2d 190 [1973]). 2024Courts generally determine the validity of an arbitration clause separately from the validity of the underlying agreement. "[C]ourts are required to treat an agreement containing an arbitration clause as if there were two separate agreements-the substantive agreement between the parties, and the agreement to arbitrate" (Matter of O'Neill v Krebs Communications Corp., 16 AD3d 144 , 144 [1st Dept 2005], citing Weinrott v Carp, 32 NY2d 190 [1973]). | 3 | 2005–2025 |
O'Neill v. Krebs Communications Corp.
green
2 sentences2025Pursuant to the First Department, courts must "treat an agreement containing an arbitration clause as if there were two separate agreements-the substantive agreement between the parties, and the agreement to arbitration" (O'Neill v Krebs Communications Corp., 16 AD3d 144 , 144 [1st Dept 2005] citing Matter o.fWeinrott [Carp], 32 NY2d 190 [1973]). 2024Courts generally determine the validity of an arbitration clause separately from the validity of the underlying agreement. "[C]ourts are required to treat an agreement containing an arbitration clause as if there were two separate agreements-the substantive agreement between the parties, and the agreement to arbitrate" (Matter of O'Neill v Krebs Communications Corp., 16 AD3d 144 , 144 [1st Dept 2005], citing Weinrott v Carp, 32 NY2d 190 [1973]). | 2 | 2024–2025 |
Integrated Sales, Inc. v. Maxell Corp. of America
green
1 sentence2005With respect to an arbitrator exceeding his power, “New York courts have uniformly held that an arbitrator exceeds his powers only when he ignores specific limitations on the powers delegated to him in the arbitration clause or he gives a completely irrational construction to the provisions of the parties’ agreement, thereby effectively rewriting it” (Integrated Sales, 94 AD2d at 225 ; see also Matter of Silverman, 61 NY2d at 307 [“any limitation upon the power of the arbitrator must be set forth as part of the arbitration clause itself, for to infer a limitation from the substantive provision | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.
green
1 sentence2005Co., 388 US 395 [1967]). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
McAlley v. Boise-Griffin Steamship Co.
green
1 sentence1993Respondent’s reliance on McAlley v Boise-Griffin S. S. Co. ( 81 AD2d 771 , appeal dismissed 54 NY2d 827 ), is misplaced since, unlike here, petitioner there relied upon the agreement containing an arbitration clause as the basis for its claims. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
McAlley v. Boise-Griffin Steamship Co.
neutral
1 sentence1993Respondent’s reliance on McAlley v Boise-Griffin S. S. Co. ( 81 AD2d 771 , appeal dismissed 54 NY2d 827 ), is misplaced since, unlike here, petitioner there relied upon the agreement containing an arbitration clause as the basis for its claims. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Johnston v. Silverman
neutral
1 sentence1992Recognizing that an individual who in a representative capacity signs an agreement containing an arbitration clause cannot be compelled to arbitrate (see, Johnston v Silverman, 167 AD2d 284 ), respondent seeks to pierce the corporate veil, relying primarily on the corporation’s admitted failure to follow corporate formalities. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
In Re the Arbitration Between International Association of MacHinists, District No. 15, Local No. 402, & Cutler-Hammer, Inc.
green
2 sentences1955The mere assertion by a party to an agreement containing an arbitration clause that there is an arbitrable dispute as to the meaning or application of a contract is not enough (Matter of International Assn. of Machinists [Cutler-Hammer, Inc.], 271 App. Div. 917 , affd. 297 N. Y. 519 ; Matter of Brookside Mills [Raybrook Textile Corp.], 276 App. Div. 357 ). 1955The mere assertion by a party to an agreement containing an arbitration clause that there is an arbitrable dispute as to the meaning or application of a contract is not enough (Matter of International Assn. of Machinists [Cutler-Hammer, Inc.], 271 App. Div. 917 , affd. 297 N. Y. 519 ; Matter of Brookside Mills [Raybrook Textile Corp.], 276 App. Div. 357 ). | 1 | 1955–1955 |
In re Worcester Silk Mills Corp.
green
1 sentence1951(Cf. Matter of Worcester Silk Mills Corp., 50 F. 2d 966 .) If one of the issues to be determined is whether or not an agreement containing an arbitration clause has been cancelled, it must be determined by arbitrators if the language of the arbitration clause is sufficiently broad to express such an intention. | 1 | 1951–1951 |
In re the Arbitration between General Electric Co. & United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America
green
1 sentence1950Workers) ( 196 Misc. 143, 146 ): “ The law is settled that the mere assertion by a party to an agreement containing an arbitration clause, such as the one here involved, that there is a dispute as to the meaning or application of the contract is not enough to entitle it to arbitration. | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.