§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Monarch Consulting, Inc., et al., Respondents,v.National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, Appellant.---------------------------------In the Matter of National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, Appellant, v. Priority Business Services, Inc., formerly known as Inland Valley Staffing Services,, Respondent.---------------------------------In the Matter of National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, Appellant, v. Source One Staffing, LLC., Respondent.

Brief

78 Cited authorities

  1. Rent-A-Ctr. v. Jackson

    561 U.S. 63 (2010)   Cited 2,793 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an arbitration provision is severable from the remainder of the contract," even where the contract containing the arbitration provision is itself an arbitration agreement (quoting Buckeye , 546 U.S. at 445, 126 S.Ct. 1204 )

  2. Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.

    537 U.S. 79 (2002)   Cited 2,590 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that compliance with a time-limit on the initiation of arbitration was not a gateway "question of arbitrability" that was reserved for the courts as it was procedural rather than substantive

  3. AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Commc'ns Workers of Am.

    475 U.S. 643 (1986)   Cited 5,498 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it was for the court to decide whether a particular labor dispute fell within the arbitration clause of a collective-bargaining agreement

  4. Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna

    546 U.S. 440 (2006)   Cited 2,063 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing necessarily prevents a court from finding an arbitration clause unenforceable in a contract that it later finds is enforceable

  5. Green Tree Fin. Corp.-Ala. v. Randolph

    531 U.S. 79 (2000)   Cited 2,460 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that claims under the Truth in Lending Act are arbitrable

  6. Mitsubishi Motors v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth

    473 U.S. 614 (1985)   Cited 4,313 times   44 Legal Analyses
    Holding antitrust claims arbitrable because, even if they are arbitrated, antitrust law "will continue to serve both its remedial and deterrent function"

  7. Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.

    500 U.S. 20 (1991)   Cited 3,071 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim arising under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (1994 ed.), may be subject to compulsory arbitration

  8. Doctor's Assocs., Inc. v. Casarotto

    517 U.S. 681 (1996)   Cited 1,910 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that Montana's first-page notice requirement, which governs not ‘any contract,’ but specifically and solely contracts ‘subject to arbitration,’ conflicts with the FAA and is therefore displaced by the federal measure."

  9. R. De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.

    490 U.S. 477 (1989)   Cited 1,558 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if Supreme Court precedent has direct application to case, "the Court of Appeals should follow the case which directly controls, leaving to th[e Supreme] Court the prerogative of overruling its own decisions"

  10. Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.

    388 U.S. 395 (1967)   Cited 2,992 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts are the proper forum to evaluate a challenge to the validity of an arbitration clause, but that where the entire agreement of which an arbitration clause is but a part is challenged, such evaluation is properly left to the arbitrator

  11. Section 2 - Validity, irrevocability, and enforcement of agreements to arbitrate

    9 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 11,281 times   120 Legal Analyses
    Granting federal jurisdiction where there is "a transaction involving [interstate] commerce"

  12. Section 2698 - Title of part

    Cal. Lab. Code § 2698   Cited 1,633 times   36 Legal Analyses

    This part shall be known and may be cited as the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004. Ca. Lab. Code § 2698 Added by Stats 2003 ch 906 (SB 796), s 2, eff. 1/1/2004.

  13. Section 1012 - Regulation by State law; Federal law relating specifically to insurance; applicability of certain Federal laws after June 30, 1948

    15 U.S.C. § 1012   Cited 1,028 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Establishing an exception to the reverse preemption rule where federal law "specifically relates to the business of insurance."

  14. Section 22:868 - Limiting actions; jurisdiction; venue

    La. Stat. tit. 22 § 868   Cited 131 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing for a two-year prescriptive period for insurance disputes

  15. Section 435.350 - Validity of arbitration agreement, exceptions

    Mo. Rev. Stat. § 435.350   Cited 75 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Excluding "contracts of insurance" from arbitrability

  16. Section 9-9-2 - Applicability; exclusive method

    Ga. Code § 9-9-2   Cited 74 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Excepting a variety of contracts from state's arbitration provision including agreements to arbitrate "future claims arising out of personal bodily injury or wrongful death based on tort"

  17. Section 5-401 - [Repealed]

    Kan. Stat. § 5-401   Cited 57 times   2 Legal Analyses

    K.S.A. 5-401 Repealed by L. 2018, ch. 90,§ 35, eff. 7/1/2018. L. 1973, ch. 24, § 1; L. 1977, ch. 25, § 1; L. 1987, ch. 38, § 1; L. 1995, ch. 155, § 2; July 1.

  18. Section 11658 - Copy of form or endorsement filed for approval

    Cal. Ins. Code § 11658   Cited 48 times   5 Legal Analyses

    (a) A workers' compensation insurance policy or endorsement shall not be issued by an insurer to any person in this state unless the insurer files a copy of the form or endorsement with the rating organization pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 11750.3 and 30 days have expired from the date the form or endorsement is received by the commissioner from the rating organization without notice from the commissioner, unless the commissioner gives written approval of the form or endorsement prior to

  19. Section 1363.1 - Disclosure regarding binding arbitration

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 1363.1   Cited 46 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Any health care service plan that includes terms that require binding arbitration to settle disputes and that restrict, or provide for a waiver of, the right to a jury trial shall include, in clear and understandable language, a disclosure that meets all of the following conditions: (a) The disclosure shall clearly state whether the plan uses binding arbitration to settle disputes, including specifically whether the plan uses binding arbitration to settle claims of medical malpractice. (b) The disclosure

  20. Section 25-2602.01 - Validity of arbitration agreement

    Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-2602.01   Cited 30 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth the requirements for a valid arbitration agreement