Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 90,173, 21 Employee Benefits Cas. 2803 Kevin Miller v. Dr. Charles W. Flume

How courts have described this case

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

• agreeing with Wheat, First Secs. that “an investor is not a ‘customer’ of an NASD firm for purposes of claims that arose while the claimant was a customer of a predecessor-in-interest, at least in the absence of any contractual provisions to the contrary”
• “[O]nce it is clear that the parties have a contract that provides for arbitration of some issues between them, any doubts concerning the scope of the arbitration clause are resolved in favor of arbitration.”
• “[O]nce it is clear that the parties have a contract that provides for arbitration of some issues between them, any doubts concerning the scope of the arbitration clause are resolved in favor of arbitration.”
• “[O]nce it is clear that the parties have a contract that provides for arbitration of some issues between them, any doubts concerning the scope of the arbitration clause are resolved in favor of arbitration.”
• interpreting the same NASD provision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).