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.
6 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey 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 |
|---|---|---|
Choctaw Generation Limited Partnership v. American Home Assurance Companygreen2 sentences2009Home Assurance Co., 271 F. 3d 403, 406 (2d Cir.2001) (signatory to an arbitration agreement may be estopped from avoiding arbitration with a non-signatory when the issue in dispute between the parties is bound up in a contract containing an arbitration clause); MS Dealer Serv. 2006Home Assurance Co., 271 F. 3d 403, 406 (2d Cir. 2001) (signatory to an arbitration agreement may be estopped from avoiding arbitration with a nonsignatory when the issue in dispute between the parties is bound up *774 in a contract containing an arbitration clause); M.S. | 2 | 2 |
In Re the Arbitration Between Nuclear Electric Insurance Ltd. & Central Power & Light Co.green1 sentence2020Ins. v. Central Power & Light Co., 926 F. Supp. 428, 434 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (finding that where a party claims it never assented to a contract containing an arbitration clause due A-0279-19T1 16 to fraud, that party.s claim must first be evaluated by a court before the dispute can referred to arbitration). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Douzinas v. American Bureau of Shipping, Inc.
green
2 sentences2017"One circumstance that frequently warrants such estoppel is 'when the signatory to the contract containing an arbitration clause raises allegations of substantially interdependent and concerted misconduct by both the non-signatory and one or more of the signatories to the contract.'" Ibid. (citation omitted). 2017Refusal to compel arbitration in such a setting "would render the arbitration between the signatories meaningless and thwart the state and federal policy in favor of arbitration." Ibid. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Angrisani v. Financial Technology Ventures
green
2 sentences2013The panel also *192 distinguished several federal eases that applied equitable estoppel to compel arbitration, finding that “those cases generally involved situations where a party to a contract containing an arbitration clause [sought] to bring an action ... against a non-signatory to the contract that [was] closely aligned to a contracting party, such as a parent or successor corporation.” Id. at 154 , 952 A.2d 1140 . 2013The panel also *192 distinguished several federal eases that applied equitable estoppel to compel arbitration, finding that “those cases generally involved situations where a party to a contract containing an arbitration clause [sought] to bring an action ... against a non-signatory to the contract that [was] closely aligned to a contracting party, such as a parent or successor corporation.” Id. at 154 , 952 A.2d 1140 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
MS Dealer Service Corp. v. Franklin
green
1 sentence2009Corp. v. Franklin, 177 F. 3d 942 , 947 (11th Cir.1999) (signatory may be estopped from denying arbitration when "claims against a nonsignatory make[] reference to or presume[] the existence of the written agreement") (internal citations omitted); McBro Planning & Dev. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C.
green
1 sentence2008However, those cases, with the possible exception of Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1013 , 121 S.Ct. 570 , 148 L.Ed.2d 488 (2000), do not stand for the broad proposition that a party can be forced to arbitrate a claim that he has not agreed to arbitrate based solely on that claim’s relationship to an agreement containing an arbitration provision. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Sunkist Soft Drinks, Inc., Del Monte Corporation, Nabisco Brands, Inc. v. Sunkist Growers, Inc.
green
1 sentence2008For example, in Sunkist Soft Drinks v. Sunkist Growers, Inc., 10 F.3d 753 (11th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 869 , 115 S.Ct. 190 , 130 L.Ed. 2d 123 (1994), Sunkist and SSD entered into a license agreement that contained an arbitration clause. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan
green
2 sentences2008If the cases relied upon by FT Ventures actually held that a party to a contract containing an arbitration clause could be forced to arbitrate a claim against a non-signatory to the contract simply because his claim was “inextricably intertwined” with that contract, those eases could not be reconciled with the fundamental principle that “a party can be forced to arbitrate only those issues it has specifically agreed to submit to arbitration[.]” First Options, supra, 514 U.S. at 945 , 115 S.Ct. at 1925 , 131 L.Ed.2d at 994 . 2008If the cases relied upon by FT Ventures actually held that a party to a contract containing an arbitration clause could be forced to arbitrate a claim against a non-signatory to the contract simply because his claim was “inextricably intertwined” with that contract, those eases could not be reconciled with the fundamental principle that “a party can be forced to arbitrate only those issues it has specifically agreed to submit to arbitration[.]” First Options, supra, 514 U.S. at 945 , 115 S.Ct. at 1925 , 131 L.Ed.2d at 994 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Velazquez v. United States
green
1 sentence2008However, those cases, with the possible exception of Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1013 , 121 S.Ct. 570 , 148 L.Ed.2d 488 (2000), do not stand for the broad proposition that a party can be forced to arbitrate a claim that he has not agreed to arbitrate based solely on that claim’s relationship to an agreement containing an arbitration provision. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Music Square Church v. United States
green
1 sentence2008However, those cases, with the possible exception of Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1013 , 121 S.Ct. 570 , 148 L.Ed.2d 488 (2000), do not stand for the broad proposition that a party can be forced to arbitrate a claim that he has not agreed to arbitrate based solely on that claim’s relationship to an agreement containing an arbitration provision. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Lincoln Loan Co. v. City of Portland
green
1 sentence2008However, those cases, with the possible exception of Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C., 210 F.3d 524 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1013 , 121 S.Ct. 570 , 148 L.Ed.2d 488 (2000), do not stand for the broad proposition that a party can be forced to arbitrate a claim that he has not agreed to arbitrate based solely on that claim’s relationship to an agreement containing an arbitration provision. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Fodor v. Time Warner, Inc.
green
1 sentence2008For example, in Sunkist Soft Drinks v. Sunkist Growers, Inc., 10 F.3d 753 (11th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 869 , 115 S.Ct. 190 , 130 L.Ed. 2d 123 (1994), Sunkist and SSD entered into a license agreement that contained an arbitration clause. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. S-W Industries, Inc.
green
1 sentence2008For example, in Sunkist Soft Drinks v. Sunkist Growers, Inc., 10 F.3d 753 (11th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 869 , 115 S.Ct. 190 , 130 L.Ed. 2d 123 (1994), Sunkist and SSD entered into a license agreement that contained an arbitration clause. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Sunkist Growers, Inc. v. Del Monte Corp.
green
1 sentence2008For example, in Sunkist Soft Drinks v. Sunkist Growers, Inc., 10 F.3d 753 (11th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 869 , 115 S.Ct. 190 , 130 L.Ed. 2d 123 (1994), Sunkist and SSD entered into a license agreement that contained an arbitration clause. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.