Joshua Parnell v. Cashcall, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plain language in the agreement—that “any issue concerning the validity, enforceability, or scope” of the agreement—conveys the parties’ “clear and unmistakable” intent to submit to an arbitrator the threshold issue of arbitrability
• finding that “[t]he FAA governs the Loan Agreement because the parties conducted their business across state lines”
• observing that the FAA “sets forth a clear presumption – ‘a national policy’ – in favor of arbitration”
• reading Rent-A-Center to require a specific challenge to a delegation provision; challenging the contract as a whole is insufficient
• applying the forum state's law to interpret the loan agreement because \the parties provided this court with no rule of tribal law regarding contract interpretation and our research uncovered none\
• applying Georgia state law to determine who decides issues of arbitrability

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).