enforceability of an arbitration clause (Illinois) · Go Syfert
← Illinois issues

enforceability of an arbitration clause in Illinois

6 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2008 0 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Kinkel v. Cingular Wireless, LLCgreen
ill · 2006 · cited in 2 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008See Kinkel v. Cingular Wireless, LLC, 223 Ill. 2d 1, 15 (2006) (stating further analysis of the enforceability of an arbitration clause would not be necessary if the plaintiff’s claim were -5- preempted by federal law).

2008See Kinkel v. Cingular Wireless, LLC, 223 Ill. 2d 1, 15 (2006) (stating further analysis of the enforceability of an arbitration clause would not be necessary if the plaintiffs claim were preempted by federal law).

22
I.S. Joseph Co. v. Michigan Sugar Co.green
ca8 · 1986 · cited in 2 Illinois opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
2 sentences

2002Joseph Co. v. Michigan Sugar Co. , 803 F.2d 396, 400 (8th Cir. 1986)("the enforceability of an arbitration clause is a question for the court when one party denies the existence of a contract with the other").

2002Joseph Co. v. Michigan Sugar Co., 803 F.2d 396, 400 (8th Cir. 1986) (“the enforceability of an arbitration clause is a question for the court when one party denies the existence of a contract with the other”).

22

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

CaseCitedYears
In Re Universal Service Fund Telephone Billing Practices Litigation green
ksd · 2003
2 sentences

2004Universal Service, 300 F. Supp. 2d at 1121 .

2004Universal Service , 300 F. Supp. 2d at 1121 .

22004–2004

Where else courts name it

CA 26 (1989–2025) WV 11 (2002–2021) SC 9 (2007–2023) NJ 7 (1984–2026) IL 6 (2002–2008) AL 5 (1994–2002) MA 4 (1985–2006) NY 3 (2024–2025) TX 3 (2014–2019) MS 3 (2000–2026) PA 2 (2005–2016) MO 2 (2003–2013)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check