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.
10 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi 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 |
|---|---|---|
Scruggs v. Wyattgreen2 sentences2018Scruggs , 60 So.3d at 760 . 2014According to Noble Drilling, “[a] non-signatory can ‘embrace’ a contract containing an arbitration clause in two ways: (1) by knowingly seeking and obtaining ‘direct benefits’ from that contract; or (2) by seeking to enforce the terms of that contract or asserting claims that must be determined by reference to that contract.” Noble Drilling, 620 F.3d at 473 (citing Hellenic, 464 F.3d at 517-20 )* Scruggs, 60 So.3d at 767-68 . | 1 | 3 |
Grenada Living Center, LLC v. Colemangreen1 sentence2008In Coleman , the court specifically held that the case "does not stand for the proposition that non-signatories to a contract containing an arbitration clause can never be bound by arbitration." 961 So.2d at 38 (¶17). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Noble Drilling Services, Inc. v. Certex USA, Inc.
green
2 sentences2015According to Noble Drilling, “[a] non-signatory can ‘embrace’ a contract containing an arbitration clause in two ways: (1) by knowingly Seeking and' obtaining ‘direct benefits’ from that contract; or (2) by seeking to enforce the terms of that contract or asseHing claims that must be determined .by reference to that contract.” Noble Drilling, 620 F.3d at 473 (citing Hellenic [Investment Fund, Inc. v. Det Norske Veritas], 464 F.3d [514] at 517-20 [ (5th Cir.2006) ]) (emphasis added). 2014According to Noble Drilling, “[a] non-signatory can ‘embrace’ a contract containing an arbitration clause in two ways: (1) by knowingly seeking and obtaining ‘direct benefits’ from that contract; or (2) by seeking to enforce the terms of that contract or asserting claims that must be determined by reference to that contract.” Noble Drilling, 620 F.3d at 473 (citing Hellenic, 464 F.3d at 517-20 )* Scruggs, 60 So.3d at 767-68 . | 4 | 2010–2015 |
Hellenic Investment Fund, Inc. v. Det Norske Veritas
green
2 sentences2014According to Noble Drilling, “[a] non-signatory can ‘embrace’ a contract containing an arbitration clause in two ways: (1) by knowingly seeking and obtaining ‘direct benefits’ from that contract; or (2) by seeking to enforce the terms of that contract or asserting claims that must be determined by reference to that contract.” Noble Drilling, 620 F.3d at 473 (citing Hellenic, 464 F.3d at 517-20 )* Scruggs, 60 So.3d at 767-68 . 2011According to Noble Drilling, “[a] non-signatory can ‘embrace’ a contract containing an arbitration clause in two ways: (1) by knowingly seeking and obtaining ‘direct benefits’ from that contract;[ 12 ] or (2) by seeking to enforce the terms of that contract or asserting claims that must be determined by reference to that contract.” Noble Drilling, 620 F.3d at 473 (citing Hellenic, 464 F.3d at 517-20 ) (emphasis added). ¶ 22. | 3 | 2010–2014 |
Parkerson v. Smith
green
2 sentences2007In Parkerson v. Smith, 817 So.2d 529 (Miss.2002), this Court held, inter alia, that a nonsignatory to a contract containing an arbitration clause, who was not even mentioned in the arbitration clause, could not gain the benefit of compelling arbitration. 2006In Parkerson v. Smith, 817 So. 2d 529 (Miss. 2002), this Court held, inter alia, that a nonsignatory to a contract containing an arbitration clause, who was not even mentioned in the arbitration clause, could not gain the benefit of compelling arbitration. | 2 | 2006–2007 |
Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C.
green
2 sentences2005Grigson next states that equitable estoppel will allow a nonsignatory to compel arbitration, "when the signatory to the contract containing an arbitration clause raises allegations of substantially interdependent and concerted misconduct by both the nonsignatory and one or more of the signatories to the contract." Id. 2000Grigson next states that equitable estoppel will allow a nonsignatory to compel arbitration, “when the signatory to the contract containing an arbitration clause raises allegations of substantially interdependent and concerted misconduct by both the nonsignatory 13 and one or more of the signatories to the contract.” Id. | 2 | 2000–2005 |
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.