Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 92,406 R. Stockton Rush, III v. Oppenheimer & Co., and Scott Seskis

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that defendants did not waive their right to arbitration even though court had partially denied their motion to dismiss
• holding that waiver can occur when a party “sensing an adverse court decision [is, in effect, allowed] a second chance in another forum”
• concluding that defendants were not guilty of forum shopping just because they moved to dismiss and answered without raising their right to arbitration
• concluding that defendants did not waive their right to arbitration even though the court had partially denied their motion to dismiss
• holding that the defendant had not waived its arbitration right in part because “[t]his is not an instance in which ‘a party sensing an adverse court decision [is, in effect, allowed] a second chance in another forum’ ”
• holding that defendants did not waive their contractual right to compel arbitration even though they had moved to dismiss the complaint, engaged in some discovery and failed to raise the defense of arbitration in their answer

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).