Dillard v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that adhesion contracts requiring arbitration of securities disputes are not unconscionable as a matter of law
• holding that the allegedly defaulting party must make “some showing that under prevailing law[] he would be relieved of his contractual obligation to arbitrate if his allegations proved to be true”
• noting that the first-to-file rule applies in contexts where a stay or a dismissal of a case substantially similar to litigation in another court would avoid duplicative litigation
• noting that the party resisting arbitration “must make at least some showing that under prevailing law, he would be relieved of his contractual obligation to arbitrate if his allegations proved to be true”
• stating that while district court did not abuse its discretion in applying the first-to-file rule, district court did abuse its discretion in dismissing second-filed claim with prejudice, where first-filed case would have no res judicata or collateral estoppel effect on the second-filed case
• requiring “some showing that . . . he would be relieved of his contractual obligation to arbitrate” and “at least some evidence to substantiate his factual allegations”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).