Amrish Rajagopalan v. Noteworld, Llc

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the plaintiff was not equitably estopped from avoiding arbitration because his “statutory claims . . . [were] separate from the contract itself” (alteration omitted)
• holding 26 defendant could not compel arbitration based on equitable estoppel because plaintiff’s 27 RICO and state law claims were separate statutory claims and plaintiff did not allege breach 28 of contract
• holding plaintiff was not equitably estopped from avoiding arbitration because he did not contend any party breached the agreement or seek to enforce the agreement, and instead his statutory claims were separate from the agreement
• rejecting equitable estoppel theory under Washington law where the plaintiffs lawsuit stated statutory claims that were separate from the contract itself
• rejecting .equitable estoppel theory under Washington law where the plaintiffs lawsuit stated “statutory claims that are separate from the contract itself’ (internal alteration and quotation marks omitted)
• rejecting equitable estoppel theory under Washington law where the plaintiff’s lawsuit stated statutory claims that were separate from the contract itself

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).