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.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 28 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Picardi v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clark.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Picardi v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clark Anchor | green | “the faa does not require states to enforce arbitration agreements” | 4 |
| 2 | State Ex Rel. Masto v. SECOND JUDICIAL DIST. CT. | green | “as a matter of public policy, nevada courts encourage arbitration and liberally construe arbitration clauses in favor of granting arbitration.” | 4 |
| 3 | Clark County v. Empire Electric, Inc. | green | “if at the very threshold of the proceeding the defaulting party could appeal and thereby indefinitely delay the matter of arbitration, the object of the law favoring arbitration and the purpose of the written agreement of the parties would be entirely defeated.” | 4 |
| 4 | D.R. Horton, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board | green | “id. (quoting compucredit, 565 u.s. , 132 s. ct. at 669), and concluded that in either the nlra's statutory text nor its legislative history contains a congressional command against application of the faa,” | 4 |
| 5 | Nevada Gold & Casinos, Inc. v. American Heritage, Inc. | green | “primary focus in determining whether arbitration has been waived.” | 4 |
| 6 | Nevada Gold & Casinos, Inc. v. American Heritage, Inc. | green | “the party seeking to arbitrate (1) knew of his right to arbitrate, (2) acted inconsistently with that right, and (3) prejudiced the other party by his inconsistent acts.” | 4 |
| 7 | State v. Second Judicial District Court | green | “a petition for mandamus challenging an order compelling arbitration is not automatic, but a matter” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.