All persons, except infants and persons of unsound mind, may, by instrument of writing, submit to the decision of one or more arbitrators any controversy which may be existing between them, which might be the subject of an action, and may, in such submission, agree that the court having jurisdiction of the subject matter shall render judgment on the award made pursuant to such submission. In such case, however, should the parties agree upon a court without jurisdiction of the subject matters of the award, the judgment shall be rendered by the court having jurisdiction in the county of the residence of the party, or some one of them, against whom the award shall be made.
Codes, 1892, § 95; 1906, § 96; Hemingway's 1917, § 83; 1930, § 81; 1942, § 279.
Notes of Decisions
Ip Timberlands Operating Co. Ltd. v. Denmiss, 726 So. 2d 96 (Miss. 1998).
· cites it 3× “However, I disagree with the finding that the Federal Arbitration Act is applicable and question why, instead, the arbitration provisions of Miss. Code Ann. § 11-15-1 et seq. were not considered.”
Wilson v. Greyhound Bus Lines, Inc., 830 So. 2d 1151 (Miss. 2002).
· cites it 2× “" Miss.Code Ann. § 11-15-1 (1972). "A person shall not act as an arbitrator where he is interested in the subject matter in dispute.”
Slater-Moore v. Goeldner, 113 So. 3d 521 (Miss. 2013).
“Miss.Code Ann. § 11-15-1 (Rev.2004). Moreover, in IP Timberlands, we overturned our prior cases holding that predispute arbitration clauses are unenforceable and “expressly state[d] that this Court will respect the right of an individual or an entity to agree in advance of a…”
Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC v. Runnels, 126 So. 3d 137 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013).
“In his re *141 sponse in opposition to the motion, Runnels made three objections: (1) the contract could not be rewritten and was therefore void; (2) the arbitration was void ab initio and therefore could not be confirmed, and (3) Wells Fargo did not have standing in the circuit…”
Romain Powell Wilson v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. (Miss. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Miss. Code Ann. § 11-15-23 is particularly applicable: Any party complaining of an award may move the court to vacate the same upon any of the following grounds: (a) That such award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means; (b) That there was evident partiality or…”
IP Timberlands Oper Co Ltd v. Denmiss Corp (Miss. 1996).
· cites it 3× “However, I disagree with the finding that the Federal Arbitration Act is applicable and question why, instead, the arbitration provisions of Miss. Code Ann. § 11-15-1 et seq. were not considered.”
Norma Slater Moore v. Christian T. Goeldner (Miss. 2012).
“Miss. Code Ann. § 11-15-1 (Rev. 2004). Moreover, in IP Timberlands, we overturned our prior cases holding that predispute arbitration clauses are unenforceable and “expressly state[d] that this Court will respect the right of an individual or an entity to agree in advance of a…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.