in the Interest of I.J.G.

How courts have described this case

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

• expressing doubt that a non-signatory could ever successfully move to compel a signatory to arbitrate with them under a third-party-enforcement doctrine
• dismissing for lack of jurisdiction appeal from or- der denying motion to transfer venue and noting that such an order “is normally a non-appealable order”
• “[A]ccording to the SAC, Defendants’ purported skirting of U.S. regulations—with the alleged assistance of BAM— form the alleged bases of Plaintiffs’ newly alleged civil RICO claim.”
• recognizing this application of equitable estoppel under California law
• affirming a district court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration and finding that Eleventh Circuit did not have pendent jurisdiction to consider the accompanying denial of a motion to transfer venue
• “[I]t is not enough that the alleged misconduct is somehow connected to the obligations of the underlying agreements; the misconduct must be founded in or inextricably bound up with such obligations.” (cleaned up)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).