§Why CasetextPricing

Cook et al v. PenSa, Inc. et al

MOTION to Stay Discovery and Scheduling Obligations Pending Resolution of Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings

12 Cited authorities

  1. Landis v. North American Co.

    299 U.S. 248 (1936)   Cited 8,463 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a decision to stay proceedings "calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh competing interests and maintain an even balance"

  2. Hardin v. First Cash Fin. Servs., Inc.

    465 F.3d 470 (10th Cir. 2006)   Cited 135 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding existence of genuine issue of material fact regarding “making” of arbitration agreement warrants denial of motion to compel arbitration

  3. McCauley v. Halliburton Energy Serv., Inc.

    413 F.3d 1158 (10th Cir. 2005)   Cited 88 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[i]f . . . the appeal is not frivolous, [the court] will stay the litigation in the district court pending the appeal of the denial of the motion to compel arbitration"

  4. Cigna Healthcare of St. Louis, Inc. v. Kaiser

    294 F.3d 849 (7th Cir. 2002)   Cited 86 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming a district court's stay of petition to compel arbitration as parallel to state court proceedings even though some of the parties to the state court proceedings were not parties to the petition to compel

  5. Stone v. Vail Resorts Development Company

    Civil Action No. 09-cv-02081-WYD-KLM (D. Colo. Jan. 7, 2010)   Cited 31 times
    Granting rare stay due to existence of class claims and potentially onerous discovery during pendency of motion to compel arbitration which would likely foreclose pursuit of class claims

  6. Alascom, Inc. v. ITT North Electric Co.

    727 F.2d 1419 (9th Cir. 1984)   Cited 75 times
    Holding that an order staying arbitration is appealable, because otherwise "one party is deprived of the inexpensive and expeditious means by which the parties had agreed to resolve their disputes."

  7. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith v. Coors

    357 F. Supp. 2d 1277 (D. Colo. 2004)   Cited 28 times
    Holding that non-signatory to arbitration agreement may seek an order compelling arbitration when the claims are based on the same factual allegations and the claims against the non-signatories are inextricably intertwined with the arbitrable claims

  8. CUNNINGHAM v. VAN RU CREDIT CORPORATION

    Case No. 06-10452 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 21, 2006)

    Case No. 06-10452. July 21, 2006 OPINION AND ORDER LAWRENCE ZATKOFF, District Judge I. INTRODUCTION This matter is before the Court on Defendant's motion to stay discovery [docket #11] and Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to respond to Defendant's motion to compel arbitration pursuant to Rule 56(f) [docket #16]. Both parties have filed responses and replies. The Court finds that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the parties' papers and the decisional process would

  9. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 50,129 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  10. Rule 16 - Pretrial Conferences; Scheduling; Management

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 16   Cited 34,667 times   53 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the sanctions authorized by Rule 37(b)

  11. Section 4 - Failure to arbitrate under agreement; petition to United States court having jurisdiction for order to compel arbitration; notice and service thereof; hearing and determination

    9 U.S.C. § 4   Cited 6,520 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Granting authority to federal courts to compel party to participate in arbitration where a valid arbitration agreement exists

  12. Section 16 - Appeals

    9 U.S.C. § 16   Cited 1,870 times   63 Legal Analyses
    Permitting appeal of "a final decision with respect to an arbitration"