Grand Wireless, Inc. v. Verizon Wireless, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• applying principles of agency to find that employees, acting within the scope of their employment, can invoke an arbitration provision adopted by their employer
• calling into question the propriety of using federal law to determine whether a non-party to an arbitration agreement can assert its protection
• collecting policy rationales for permitting nonsignatories to enforce and be bound by arbitration clauses
• discerning an intent to allow employees to benefit from their employer’s arbitration agreement where the agreement covered “any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to” the contract
• arbitration agreement may cover claims against other parties even if those parties did not sign the agreement
• “[A]mbiguities as to the scope of the arbitration clause itself [must be] resolved in favor of arbitration.” (quoting PowerShare, Inc. v. Syntel, Inc., 597 F.3d 10, 15 (1st Cir. 2010))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).