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.
5 California opinions name it 1 courts 2008–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Malone v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2018(See Malone, supra, 226 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1559-1560.) In this case, the court found Nielsen asserted a specific, substantive challenge to the delegation clause separate from the challenge to the arbitration clause and the underlying contracts, and this challenge was not merely a device to challenge other provisions in the contract. 2018(See Malone , supra , 226 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1559-1560, 173 Cal.Rptr.3d 241 .) In this case, the court found Nielsen asserted a specific, substantive challenge to the delegation clause separate from the challenge to the arbitration clause and the underlying contracts, and this challenge was not merely a device to challenge other provisions in the contract. | 3 | 2018–2018 |
Luxor Cabs, Inc. v. Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Co.
green
1 sentence2020In light of this specific challenge to the arbitration agreement, the trial court was obligated to consider its validity ”]; Nielsen, at p. 1113 [the insured “asserted a specific, substantive challenge to the delegation clause separate from the challenge to the arbitration clause and the underlying contracts, and this challenge was not merely a device to challenge other provisions in the contract”].) Although Travelers does not argue that challenge to the arbitration agreement must be different from a challenge directed to the agreement as a whole, the courts in Jackpot Harvesting, supra, 33 C | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Jackpot Harvesting, Inc. v. Applied Underwriters, Inc.
green
1 sentence2020In light of this specific challenge to the arbitration agreement, the trial court was obligated to consider its validity ”]; Nielsen, at p. 1113 [the insured “asserted a specific, substantive challenge to the delegation clause separate from the challenge to the arbitration clause and the underlying contracts, and this challenge was not merely a device to challenge other provisions in the contract”].) Although Travelers does not argue that challenge to the arbitration agreement must be different from a challenge directed to the agreement as a whole, the courts in Jackpot Harvesting, supra, 33 C | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Nielsen Contracting, Inc. v. Applied Underwriters, Inc.
green
2 sentences2020In light of this specific challenge to the arbitration agreement, the trial court was obligated to consider its validity ”]; Nielsen, at p. 1113 [the insured “asserted a specific, substantive challenge to the delegation clause separate from the challenge to the arbitration clause and the underlying contracts, and this challenge was not merely a device to challenge other provisions in the contract”].) Although Travelers does not argue that challenge to the arbitration agreement must be different from a challenge directed to the agreement as a whole, the courts in Jackpot Harvesting, supra, 33 C 2020In light of this specific challenge to the arbitration agreement, the trial court was obligated to consider its validity ”]; Nielsen, at p. 1113 [the insured “asserted a specific, substantive challenge to the delegation clause separate from the challenge to the arbitration clause and the underlying contracts, and this challenge was not merely a device to challenge other provisions in the contract”].) Although Travelers does not argue that challenge to the arbitration agreement must be different from a challenge directed to the agreement as a whole, the courts in Jackpot Harvesting, supra, 33 C | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Higgins v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2008(Higgins v. Superior Court, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at p. 1249 .) Nevertheless, a court still must consider one type of challenge to the overall contract, i.e., a claim that the party resisting arbitration never actually agreed to be bound. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.