Kai Peng v. Uber Technologies, 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 under New York’s choice of law analysis, the applicable state contract law should be based on the state which “has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute”
• finding that December 2015 Agreement applied to dispute, noting that arbitration clauses without an express limitation apply to preexisting claims
• explaining that even if the conduct underlying the dispute predated the December 2015 agreement, the December 2015 agreement, rather than the earlier agreement, still applied to the dispute
• “The 30–day opt-out provision in the Arbitration Agreement . . . substantially negates any challenge of procedural unconscionability . . . .”
• where New York has the most significant contacts with the matter in dispute, “New York law governs the issue of whether an arbitration agreement exists between the parties”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Biller v. S-H OPCO Greenwich Bay Manor
  First Circuit· 2020-06-05· cited 21×
• Faggiano v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
  E.D. New York· 2017-12-28· cited 11×
• Uber Techs., Inc. v. Royz
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2022-09-29· cited 11×
• Rimel v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
  M.D. Florida· 2017-03-31· cited 6×
• Gold v. New York Life Insurance Co.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 2017-07-18· cited 5×

Cites

52 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.
  Supreme Court· 1983-02-23· cited 9,657×
• Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. Randolph
  Supreme Court· 2000-12-11· cited 1,972×
• Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 2002-12-10· cited 1,948×
• Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute
  Supreme Court· 1991-04-17· cited 1,405×
• Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle
  Supreme Court· 2009-05-04· cited 968×
• Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson
  Supreme Court· 2010-06-21· cited 909×
• American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant
  Supreme Court· 2013-06-20· cited 796×
• Auten v. Auten
  New York Court of Appeals· 1954-12-31· cited 405×
• register.com, Inc. v. Verio, Inc.
  Second Circuit· 2004-01-23· cited 391×
• Gillman v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A.
  New York Court of Appeals· 1988-12-22· cited 384×
• Katz v. Cellco Partnership
  Second Circuit· 2015-07-28· cited 372×
• CONTEC CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee, v. REMOTE SOLUTION CO., LTD., Defendant-Counterclaimant-Appellant
  Second Circuit· 2005-02-14· cited 361×
• Painewebber Incorporated v. Michael J. Bybyk and Joyce O. Bybyk
  Second Circuit· 1996-04-19· cited 355×
• Schnabel v. Trilegiant Corp. & Affinion, Inc.
  Second Circuit· 2012-09-07· cited 282×
• Ragone v. Atlantic Video at the Manhattan Center
  Second Circuit· 2010-02-17· cited 268×
• Fatemeh Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdale's, Inc.
  Ninth Circuit· 2014-06-23· cited 212×
• Zurich Insurance v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc.
  New York Court of Appeals· 1994-10-25· cited 190×
• Directv, Inc. v. Imburgia
  Supreme Court· 2015-12-14· cited 187×
• Dale S. COENEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. R. W. PRESSPRICH & CO., Inc., Defendant-Appellee, and Stirling Homex Corporation, Defendant
  Second Circuit· 1972-01-12· cited 185×
• Wachovia Bank, National Ass'n v. VCG Special Opportunities Master Fund, Ltd.
  Second Circuit· 2011-10-28· cited 172×