Skip to main content

DirecTV, Inc. v. Mattingly

Citations

  • 829 A.2d 626
  • 376 Md. 302
  • 2003 Md. LEXIS 463

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding a contract modification invalid where the service provider “failed to provide sufficient notice of the changes to the provisions” of the agreement at issue
  • finding no modification occurred when one party merely presented a modified contract to the other, with no evidence that the receiving party accepted or knew of the changes
  • reiterating cardinal principle of contract interpretation that courts will not disregard provisions of a contract unless there is no other sound way to interpret the contract
  • summary judgment appropriate when only evidence of modification was presentment of modified contract, without any evidence of acceptance or knowledge of the changes
  • “We never reach the questions controlled by the [Federal Arbitration Act] because we hold that there was never a valid agreement to arbitrate....”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cathell, Raker, Harrell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

38 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.