Gary Klein v. Nabors Drilling USA, L.P.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the scope inquiry requires courts to apply “federal policy and (continue) Of Leland Stanford Junior Univ., 489 U.S. 468, 474, 109 S.Ct. 1248, 1253, 103 L.Ed.2d 488 (1989
• noting the court “resolve[s] ambiguities in favor of arbitration” when “determining the scope of a valid arbitration agreement”
• noting the court “resolve[s] ambiguities in favor of arbitration” when “determining the scope of a valid arbitration agreement”
• “the initial question of whether there is a valid agreement to arbitrate usually concerns matters of contract formation”
• acknowledgment employee signed stating ADR program with arbitration was not “intended to violate or restrict any rights of employees guaranteed by state or federal law” did not make arbitration nonexclusive
• when “determining the scope of a valid arbitration agreement,” the court “appl[ies] federal policy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).