8 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina 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 |
|---|---|---|
American Bankers Insurance Group, Incorporated v. Richard F. Long Lillie M. Longgreen2 sentences2015Group v. Long, 453 F.3d 623, 628 (4th Cir. 2006) (providing that “a nonsignatory should be estopped from denying that it is bound by an arbitration clause when its claims against the signatory ‘arise[]from’ the contract containing the arbitration clause” (citation omitted) (alteration in original)). 2012In reversing the district court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration on the basis of equitable estoppel, the Fourth Circuit explained that, where “the issue is whether the underlying claims are such that the party asserting them should be estopped from denying the application of the arbitration clause,” a court should “examine whether the plaintiff has asserted claims in the underlying suit that, either literally or obliquely, assert a breach of a duty created by the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Id. at 629 . | 2 | 2 |
Carter v. TD AMERITRADE HOLDING CORP.green2 sentences2023App. at 548 , 548 S.E.2d at 579 . “[W]here the issue is whether the underlying claims are such that the party asserting them should be estopped from denying the application of the arbitration clause, a court should examine whether the plaintiff has asserted claims in the underlying suit that, either literally or obliquely, assert a breach of a duty created by the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Carter v. TD Ameritrade Holding Corp., 218 N.C. 2018App. 222 , 231, 721 S.E.2d 256 , 263 ("[A] court should examine whether the plaintiff has asserted claims in the underlying suit that, either literally or obliquely, assert a breach of a duty created by the contract containing the arbitration clause."). | 1 | 3 |
Smith Jamison Constr. v. APAC-Atlantic, Inc.green2 sentences2024Yet in doing so, Gray Layton overlooks the essential question of whether Plaintiff “asserted claims in the underlying suit that, either literally or obliquely, assert a breach of a duty created by the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Id. at 718 , 811 S.E.2d at 638 (citation omitted). 2024Yet in doing so, Gray Layton overlooks the essential question of whether Plaintiff “asserted claims in the underlying suit that, either literally or obliquely, assert a breach of a duty created by the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Id. at 718 , 811 S.E.2d at 638 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Eddings v. Southern Orthopedic & Musculoskeletal Associates, P.A.green1 sentence2002App. 375, 383 , 555 S.E.2d 649, 654 (2001) (pending appeal in our Supreme Court), this Court held that the FAA — versus North Carolina’s UAA — governed an arbitration clause because the contract containing the arbitration clause involved interstate commerce. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
LSB Financial Services, Inc. v. Harrison
green
1 sentence2023App. at 548 , 548 S.E.2d at 579 . “[W]here the issue is whether the underlying claims are such that the party asserting them should be estopped from denying the application of the arbitration clause, a court should examine whether the plaintiff has asserted claims in the underlying suit that, either literally or obliquely, assert a breach of a duty created by the contract containing the arbitration clause.” Carter v. TD Ameritrade Holding Corp., 218 N.C. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Ellen v. A.C. Schultes of Maryland, Inc.
green
1 sentence2018In affirming the denial of the motion to compel arbitration, this Court reasoned that while the contract containing the arbitration clause "[p]rovided part of the factual foundation for plaintiffs' complaint," the plaintiffs' claims were "dependent upon legal duties imposed by North Carolina statutory or common law rather than contract law." Id . at 322, 615 S.E.2d at 732 -33 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio v. Siler-Khodr
green
1 sentence2004Id. at 637 (citing Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. | 1 | 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.