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.
16 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1902–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama 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 |
|---|---|---|
Chris Myers Pontiac-GMC, Inc. v. Perotgreen2 sentences2026"When an arbitration provision indicates that the AAA rules will apply to the arbitration proceedings, we have held that it is 'clear and unmistakable' that substantive- arbitrability decisions are to be made by the arbitrator; this includes the decision whether the arbitration provision may be enforced against a nonsignatory to the contract: " '[T]he arbitration provision in this case provides that any arbitration proceedings will be conducted "pursuant to the then-prevailing commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association." The relevant commercial arbitration rule, Rule 2026"When an arbitration provision indicates that the AAA rules will apply to the arbitration proceedings, we have held that it is 'clear and unmistakable' that substantive- arbitrability decisions are to be made by the arbitrator; this includes the decision whether the arbitration provision may be enforced against a nonsignatory to the contract: " '[T]he arbitration provision in this case provides that any arbitration proceedings will be conducted "pursuant to the then-prevailing commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association." The relevant commercial arbitration rule, Rule | 4 | 5 |
Federal Insurance Co. v. Reedstromgreen2 sentences2025Co. v. Reedstrom, 197 So. 3d 971, 976 (Ala. 2015) ("[T]he arbitration provision in this case provides that any arbitration proceedings will be conducted 'pursuant to the then-prevailing commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association.' The relevant commercial arbitration rule, Rule 7(a), expressly provides, in its current form, that '[t]he arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction, including any objections with respect to the existence, scope, or validity of the arbitration agreement or to the arbitrability of any claim or counterclaim.' "), an 2024This Court reiterated this conclusion in Federal Insurance Co. v. Reedstrom, 197 So. 3d 971, 976 (Ala. 2015): " 'Like the arbitration agreement in Anderton[ v. Practice-Monroeville, P.C., 164 So. 3d 1094 (Ala. 2014)], the arbitration provisions in this case provides that any arbitration proceeding will be conducted "pursuant to the then-prevailing commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association." The relevant commercial arbitration rule, Rule 7(a), expressly provides, in its current form, that "[t]he arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction, i | 2 | 5 |
Terminix International Co. LP v. Palmer Ranch Ltd. Partnershipgreen2 sentences2025Partnership, 432 F.3d 1327, 1332 (11th Cir. 2005), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit stated: 10 SC-2025-0042 " ' "[T]he parties have agreed that the arbitrator will [decide the issue of arbitrability] by providing (in all three of the arbitration clauses at issue) that 'arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules then in force of the American Arbitration Association' (AAA). [The relevant AAA rule], in turn, provides that '[t]he arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction, including any objections with r 2018Partnership , 432 F.3d 1327 , 1332 (11th Cir. 2005), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit stated: " '[T]he parties have agreed that the arbitrator will [decide the issue of arbitrability] by providing (in all three of the arbitration clauses at issue) that "arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules then in force of the American Arbitration Association" (AAA). [The relevant AAA rule], in turn, provides that "[t]he arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction, including any objections with respect to the ex | 1 | 3 |
CitiFinancial Corp., LLC v. Peoplesgreen2 sentences2012On the basis of pertinent federal authority, this Court has held that “an arbitration provision that incorporates rules that provide for the arbitrator to decide issues of arbitrability clearly and unmistakably evidences the parties’ intent to arbitrate the scope of the arbitration provision.” CitiFinancial Corp. v. Peoples, 973 So.2d 332, 340 (Ala. 2007) (emphasis added). 2009CitiFinancial Corp., L.L.C. v. Peoples, [ 973 So.2d 332, 340 , (Ala.2007)]." JHCC appellants' brief, at 27. | 1 | 2 |
Managed Health Care Admin., Inc. v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Ala.green2 sentences2024Thus, pursuant to Rule 7(a), … the question of whether [the defendant] has waived its right to enforce the arbitration provision … ha[s] been delegated to the arbitrators, and the arbitrators, not the trial court, must decide [this] threshold issue[].' "The arbitration provision in this case provides, in pertinent part: '[A]ny claim … shall be resolved by neutral binding arbitration by the American Arbitration Association, under the rules of the AAA in effect at the time the claim is 12 SC-2024-0009 filed ….' Rule 7(a) of the AAA Commercial Rules provides: 'The arbitrator shall have the power 2024Thus, pursuant to Rule 7(a), … the question of whether [the defendant] has waived its right to enforce the arbitration provision … ha[s] been delegated to the arbitrators, and the arbitrators, not the trial court, must decide [this] threshold issue[].' "The arbitration provision in this case provides, in pertinent part: '[A]ny claim … shall be resolved by neutral binding arbitration by the American Arbitration Association, under the rules of the AAA in effect at the time the claim is 12 SC-2024-0009 filed ….' Rule 7(a) of the AAA Commercial Rules provides: 'The arbitrator shall have the power | 1 | 1 |
Bugs \R\" Usgreen2 sentences2024Thus, pursuant to Rule 7(a), … the question of whether [the defendant] has waived its right to enforce the arbitration provision … ha[s] been delegated to the arbitrators, and the arbitrators, not the trial court, must decide [this] threshold issue[].' "The arbitration provision in this case provides, in pertinent part: '[A]ny claim … shall be resolved by neutral binding arbitration by the American Arbitration Association, under the rules of the AAA in effect at the time the claim is 12 SC-2024-0009 filed ….' Rule 7(a) of the AAA Commercial Rules provides: 'The arbitrator shall have the power 2024Thus, pursuant to Rule 7(a), … the question of whether [the defendant] has waived its right to enforce the arbitration provision … ha[s] been delegated to the arbitrators, and the arbitrators, not the trial court, must decide [this] threshold issue[].' "The arbitration provision in this case provides, in pertinent part: '[A]ny claim … shall be resolved by neutral binding arbitration by the American Arbitration Association, under the rules of the AAA in effect at the time the claim is 12 SC-2024-0009 filed ….' Rule 7(a) of the AAA Commercial Rules provides: 'The arbitrator shall have the power | 1 | 1 |
Polaris Sales, Inc. v. HERITAGE IMPORTSgreen1 sentence2017See also Polaris Sales, Inc. v. Heritage Imports, Inc. , 879 So.2d 1129 , 1133 (Ala. 2003) ("Questions of arbitrability include those relating to the scope, interpretation, and application of the arbitration agreement, Jim Burke Auto., Inc. v. McGrue , 826 So.2d 122 , 132 (Ala. 2002), as well as the issue whether a party has waived its right to demand arbitration by 'substantially invok[ing] the litigation process.' Hales v. ProEquities, Inc. , [885] So.2d [100], [105] (Ala. 2003)."). | 1 | 1 |
Jim Burke Automotive, Inc. v. McGruegreen1 sentence2017See also Polaris Sales, Inc. v. Heritage Imports, Inc. , 879 So.2d 1129 , 1133 (Ala. 2003) ("Questions of arbitrability include those relating to the scope, interpretation, and application of the arbitration agreement, Jim Burke Auto., Inc. v. McGrue , 826 So.2d 122 , 132 (Ala. 2002), as well as the issue whether a party has waived its right to demand arbitration by 'substantially invok[ing] the litigation process.' Hales v. ProEquities, Inc. , [885] So.2d [100], [105] (Ala. 2003)."). | 1 | 1 |
Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchellgreen2 sentences1932See Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, 269 U. S. 514, 523, 524 , 46 S. Ct. 172 , 70 L. 1932See Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, 269 U. S. 514, 523, 524 , 46 S. Ct. 172 , 70 L. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Eric Anderton and Jackson Key Practice Solutions, LLC v. The Practice-Monroeville, P.C.
green
2 sentences2024This Court reiterated this conclusion in Federal Insurance Co. v. Reedstrom, 197 So. 3d 971, 976 (Ala. 2015): " 'Like the arbitration agreement in Anderton[ v. Practice-Monroeville, P.C., 164 So. 3d 1094 (Ala. 2014)], the arbitration provisions in this case provides that any arbitration proceeding will be conducted "pursuant to the then-prevailing commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association." The relevant commercial arbitration rule, Rule 7(a), expressly provides, in its current form, that "[t]he arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction, i 2017This Court reiterated this conclusion in Federal Insurance Co. v. Reedstrom , 197 So.3d 971 , 976 (Ala. 2015) : " 'Like the arbitration agreement in Anderton [v. The Practice-Monroeville, P.C. , 164 So.3d 1094 (Ala. 2014) ], the arbitration provision in this case provides that any arbitration proceedings will be conducted "pursuant to the then-prevailing commercial arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association." The relevant commercial arbitration rule, Rule 7(a), expressly provides, in its current form, that "[t]he arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his or her own jurisdic | 3 | 2017–2024 |
Marbury v. Madison
green
2 sentences2001The Constitution gives the Court of the Judiciary the sole power to try a judge or justice for a violation of one or more of the canons; and the Constitution does not prohibit the Court of the Judiciary from deciding constitutional issues involving the canons. [7] In Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 179 , 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803), in reference to the United States Constitution, the United States Supreme Court wrote: "Could it be the intention of those who gave this power, to say that in using it the constitution should not be looked into? 2001The Constitution gives the Court of the Judiciary the sole power to try a judge or justice for a violation of one or more of the canons; and the Constitution does not prohibit the Court of the Judiciary from deciding constitutional issues involving the canons. [7] In Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 179 , 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803), in reference to the United States Constitution, the United States Supreme Court wrote: "Could it be the intention of those who gave this power, to say that in using it the constitution should not be looked into? | 1 | 2001–2001 |
First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan
green
2 sentences1999The arbitrators decided that they had the power to rule on the merits of the parties' dispute, and did so in favor of First Options." Id. at 941 , 115 S.Ct. 1920 . 1999The arbitrators decided that they had the power to rule on the merits of the parties' dispute, and did so in favor of First Options." Id. at 941 , 115 S.Ct. 1920 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Burton v. State
neutral
2 sentences1966In Burton v. State, 40 Ala.App. 146 , 109 So.2d 311 , we find: “In addition the alleged agreement which counsel for appellant contends was made was beyond the power of defense counsel and the solicitor to make, in that the sentence to be imposed was within the sole province of the jury [we here interpolate “court” for this crime], and the matter of probation was in the sole province of the court.” (Bracketed matter added.) We have heretofore noted that we have no fluoroscope to view in retrospect the flux of the trial judge’s mind as he considers the question of fixing punishment. 1966In Burton v. State, 40 Ala.App. 146 , 109 So.2d 311 , we find: “In addition the alleged agreement which counsel for appellant contends was made was beyond the power of defense counsel and the solicitor to make, in that the sentence to be imposed was within the sole province of the jury [we here interpolate “court” for this crime], and the matter of probation was in the sole province of the court.” (Bracketed matter added.) We have heretofore noted that we have no fluoroscope to view in retrospect the flux of the trial judge’s mind as he considers the question of fixing punishment. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
Adler v. Sullivan
green
1 sentence1902The inequity that was designed to be remedied grew out of the situation of a person in tire possession of land as owner, in which land another person claimed an interest which he would not enforce; and the hardship' was that the person so in possession could not force his adversary to sue and thus put the claim to test.” It is true the statute does not require the complainant- to “have title by possession or the right to possession or even adverse possession,” but it does require that he shall have peaceable possession, as contradistinguished from disputed or contested possession, and that it | 1 | 1902–1902 |
Brand v. United States Car Co.
neutral
1 sentence1902The inequity that was designed to be remedied grew out of the situation of a person in tire possession of land as owner, in which land another person claimed an interest which he would not enforce; and the hardship' was that the person so in possession could not force his adversary to sue and thus put the claim to test.” It is true the statute does not require the complainant- to “have title by possession or the right to possession or even adverse possession,” but it does require that he shall have peaceable possession, as contradistinguished from disputed or contested possession, and that it | 1 | 1902–1902 |
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.