Kittay v. Landegger (In Re Hagerstown Fiber Ltd. Partnership)

How courts have described this case

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

• indicating that a non-core matter “is unlikely to present a conflict sufficient to override by implication the presumption in favor of arbitration”
• stating that the first factor to consider is whether the parties agreed to arbitrate
• noting that “[w]hen arbitration law meets bankruptcy law head on, clashes inevitably develop.”
• stating a “paradigmatic broad [arbitration] clause extends” to disputes “relating to or in connection with the contract”
• “[Notwithstanding the possibility of bifurcated or even trifurcated proceedings, or duplicative proceedings involving multiple parties, a court generally lacks the discretion to refuse to compel the arbitration of noncore claims”
• “[Notwithstanding the possibility of bifurcated or even trifurcated proceedings, or duplicative proceedings involving multiple parties, a court generally lacks the discretion to refuse to compel the arbitration of non-core claims”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).