Gustavsson v. Washington Mut. Bank, FA

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a bank customer was not bound to arbitrate where the signature card that was signed referenced a collateral document which contained an arbitration clause, but the bank never sent the customer a copy of the collateral document
• reversing where the bank’s signature card said “see reverse side for important information,” and the reverse side was blank, so it “did not refer to arbitration, or expressly refer and sufficiently describe another document containing an arbitration agreement”
• whether the party sought to be compelled to arbitrate could be bound by an arbitration provision in a document, which he never saw, supposedly incorporated by reference into the contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).