12 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2025 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jensen v. U-Haul Co. of Cal.green2 sentences2024The Tort Defendants analogize their theory to the concept of arbitration by estoppel, under which “non-signatory plaintiffs may be estopped from refusing to arbitrate if their claims ‘depend[ ] upon, or [are] inextricably intertwined with’ the contractual obligations of the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Peterson v. Devita, 2023 IL App (1st) 230356, ¶ 45 (quoting Jensen v. U-Haul Co. of California, 18 Cal. App. 5th 295, 306 (2017)). ¶ 147 However, the Illinois Supreme Court has squarely rejected the theory of arbitration by estoppel, stating that “under basic principles of contra 2024The Tort Defendants analogize their theory to the concept of arbitration by estoppel, under which “non-signatory plaintiffs may be estopped from refusing to arbitrate if their claims ‘depend[ ] upon, or [are] inextricably intertwined with’ the contractual obligations of the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Peterson v. Devita, 2023 IL App (1st) 230356, ¶ 45 (quoting Jensen v. U-Haul Co. of California, 18 Cal. App. 5th 295, 306 (2017)). ¶ 146 However, the Illinois Supreme Court has squarely rejected the theory of arbitration by estoppel, stating that “under basic principles of contra | 3 | 3 |
Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C.green2 sentences2004See also Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. Bailey, 364 F.3d 260, 267-68 (5th Cir. 2004); Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524, 528 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel, the court held that “a signatory to [an] agreement cannot *** ‘have it both ways’: it cannot, on the one hand, seek to hold the non[ ] signatory liable pursuant to duties imposed by the agreement, which contains an arbitration provision, but, on the other hand, deny arbitration’s applicability because the defendant is a non[ ]signatory” (emphasis omitted)). 2004See also Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. Bailey, 364 F.3d 260, 267-68 (5th Cir. 2004); Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524, 528 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel, the court held that “a signatory to [an] agreement cannot *** ‘have it both ways’: it cannot, on the one hand, seek to hold the non[ ]signatory liable pursuant to duties imposed by the agreement, which contains an arbitration provision, but, on the other hand, deny arbitration’s applicability because the defendant is a non[ ]signatory” (emphasis in original)); International Pape | 3 | 3 |
Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. Baileygreen2 sentences2004See also Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. Bailey, 364 F.3d 260, 267-68 (5th Cir. 2004); Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524, 528 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel, the court held that “a signatory to [an] agreement cannot *** ‘have it both ways’: it cannot, on the one hand, seek to hold the non[ ] signatory liable pursuant to duties imposed by the agreement, which contains an arbitration provision, but, on the other hand, deny arbitration’s applicability because the defendant is a non[ ]signatory” (emphasis omitted)). 2004See also Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. Bailey, 364 F.3d 260, 267-68 (5th Cir. 2004); Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524, 528 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel, the court held that “a signatory to [an] agreement cannot *** ‘have it both ways’: it cannot, on the one hand, seek to hold the non[ ]signatory liable pursuant to duties imposed by the agreement, which contains an arbitration provision, but, on the other hand, deny arbitration’s applicability because the defendant is a non[ ]signatory” (emphasis in original)); International Pape | 3 | 3 |
Peterson v. Devitagreen2 sentences2024The Tort Defendants analogize their theory to the concept of arbitration by estoppel, under which “non-signatory plaintiffs may be estopped from refusing to arbitrate if their claims ‘depend[ ] upon, or [are] inextricably intertwined with’ the contractual obligations of the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Peterson v. Devita, 2023 IL App (1st) 230356, ¶ 45 (quoting Jensen v. U-Haul Co. of California, 18 Cal. App. 5th 295, 306 (2017)). ¶ 147 However, the Illinois Supreme Court has squarely rejected the theory of arbitration by estoppel, stating that “under basic principles of contra 2024The Tort Defendants analogize their theory to the concept of arbitration by estoppel, under which “non-signatory plaintiffs may be estopped from refusing to arbitrate if their claims ‘depend[ ] upon, or [are] inextricably intertwined with’ the contractual obligations of the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Peterson v. Devita, 2023 IL App (1st) 230356, ¶ 45 (quoting Jensen v. U-Haul Co. of California, 18 Cal. App. 5th 295, 306 (2017)). ¶ 146 However, the Illinois Supreme Court has squarely rejected the theory of arbitration by estoppel, stating that “under basic principles of contra | 2 | 2 |
Carter v. SSC Odin Operating Companygreen2 sentences2024The Tort Defendants analogize their theory to the concept of arbitration by estoppel, under which “non-signatory plaintiffs may be estopped from refusing to arbitrate if their claims ‘depend[ ] upon, or [are] inextricably intertwined with’ the contractual obligations of the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Peterson v. Devita, 2023 IL App (1st) 230356, ¶ 45 (quoting Jensen v. U-Haul Co. of California, 18 Cal. App. 5th 295, 306 (2017)). ¶ 147 However, the Illinois Supreme Court has squarely rejected the theory of arbitration by estoppel, stating that “under basic principles of contra 2024The Tort Defendants analogize their theory to the concept of arbitration by estoppel, under which “non-signatory plaintiffs may be estopped from refusing to arbitrate if their claims ‘depend[ ] upon, or [are] inextricably intertwined with’ the contractual obligations of the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Peterson v. Devita, 2023 IL App (1st) 230356, ¶ 45 (quoting Jensen v. U-Haul Co. of California, 18 Cal. App. 5th 295, 306 (2017)). ¶ 146 However, the Illinois Supreme Court has squarely rejected the theory of arbitration by estoppel, stating that “under basic principles of contra | 2 | 2 |
Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.green2 sentences2004Ed. 2d 1270, 1277 , 87 S. Ct. 1801, 1806 (1967), Quik contends that under the FAA a court may consider only issues relating to the making and performance of the agreement to arbitrate, not the enforceability or validity of the contract containing the arbitration clause as a whole, and that questions concerning the validity and enforceability of the contract are for the arbitrator, not the courts, to decide. 2004Ed. 2d 1270, 1277 , 87 S. Ct. 1801, 1806 (1967), Quik contends that under the FAA a court may consider only issues relating to the making and performance of the agreement to arbitrate, not the enforceability or validity of the contract containing the arbitration clause as a whole, and that questions concerning the validity and enforceability of the contract are for the arbitrator, not the courts, to decide. | 2 | 2 |
Renee Everett v. Paul Davis Restoration, Incorpgreen2 sentences2025See Coatney v. Ancestry.com DNA, LLC, 93 F.4th 1014, 1025 (7th Cir. 2024); Everett v. Paul Davis Restoration, Inc., 771 F.3d 380, 383 (7th Cir. 2014). 2022Under this doctrine, “a non-signatory party is estopped from avoiding arbitration if she ‘knowingly seeks the benefits of the contract containing the arbitration clause.’ ” Id. (quoting Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Watts Industries, Inc., 417 F.3d 682, 688 (7th Cir. 2005)). | 1 | 2 |
Alex Coatney v. Ancestry.com DNA, LLCgreen1 sentence2025See Coatney v. Ancestry.com DNA, LLC, 93 F.4th 1014, 1025 (7th Cir. 2024); Everett v. Paul Davis Restoration, Inc., 771 F.3d 380, 383 (7th Cir. 2014). | 1 | 1 |
Zurich American Insurance Company v. Watts Industriesgreen1 sentence2022Under this doctrine, “a non-signatory party is estopped from avoiding arbitration if she ‘knowingly seeks the benefits of the contract containing the arbitration clause.’ ” Id. (quoting Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Watts Industries, Inc., 417 F.3d 682, 688 (7th Cir. 2005)). | 1 | 1 |
cluster 394161green1 sentence2004See also Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. Bailey, 364 F.3d 260, 267-68 (5th Cir. 2004); Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524, 528 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel, the court held that “a signatory to [an] agreement cannot *** ‘have it both ways’: it cannot, on the one hand, seek to hold the non[ ]signatory liable pursuant to duties imposed by the agreement, which contains an arbitration provision, but, on the other hand, deny arbitration’s applicability because the defendant is a non[ ]signatory” (emphasis in original)); International Pape | 1 | 1 |
International Paper Company v. Schwabedissen Maschinen & Anlagen Gmbhgreen1 sentence2004See also Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. Bailey, 364 F.3d 260, 267-68 (5th Cir. 2004); Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524, 528 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel, the court held that “a signatory to [an] agreement cannot *** ‘have it both ways’: it cannot, on the one hand, seek to hold the non[ ]signatory liable pursuant to duties imposed by the agreement, which contains an arbitration provision, but, on the other hand, deny arbitration’s applicability because the defendant is a non[ ]signatory” (emphasis in original)); International Pape | 1 | 1 |
Seifert v. US Home Corp.green1 sentence2002Under Florida case law, “the determination of whether a particular claim must be submitted to arbitration necessarily depends on the existence of some nexus between the dispute and the contract containing the-arbitration clause.” Seifert v. U.S. Home Corp., 750 So. 2d 633, 638 (Fla. 1999). | 1 | 1 |
Kelso-Burnett Co. v. Zeus Development Corp.green1 sentence1983See Kelso-Burnett Co. v. Zeus Development Corp. (1982), 107 Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
MS Dealer Service Corp. v. Franklin
green
2 sentences2004First, equitable estoppel applies when the signatory to a written agreement containing an arbitration clause ‘must rely on the terms of the written agreement in asserting [its] claims’ against the non-signatory. [Citation.] When each, of a signatory’s claims against a nonsignatory ‘makes reference to’ or ‘presumes the existence of the written agreement, the signatory’s claims ‘arise[ ] out of and relate[ ] directly to the [written] agreement,’ and arbitration is appropriate. [Citation.] Second, ‘application of equitable estoppel is warranted ... when the signatory [to the contract containing t 2004First, equitable estoppel applies when the signatory to a written agreement containing an arbitration clause ‘must rely on the terms of the written agreement in asserting [iis] claims’ against the non-signatory. [Citation.] When each of a signatory’s claims against a nonsignatory ‘makes reference to’ or ‘presumes the existence of the written agreement, the signatory’s claims ‘arise[ ] out of and relate[ ] directly to the [written] agreement,’ and arbitration is appropriate. [Citation.] Second, ‘application of equitable estoppel is warranted ... when the signatory [to the contract containing th | 3 | 2004–2004 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.