Lincoln Griswold v. Coventry First LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• “Pendent appellate jurisdiction exists where an appealable issue is so ‘inextricably intertwined’ with a nonappealable issue that one cannot resolve the former without addressing the latter.”
• because Plaintiff stated “a fraud antecedent to the purchase agreement,” his claim was not inextricably intertwined with the underlying Agreement and was thus not subject to its arbitration provision
• “Both Georgia and Pennsylvania law allow non-signatories to be bound to an arbitration agreement.”
• the knowingly exploits theory prevents non-signatory who seeks to enforce a contract’s provisions from excluding any arbitration clause; it prevents non-signatory from “‘cherry-picking’” provisions of a contract benefiting them but avoiding other provisions
• “Equitable estoppel thus prevents a non-signatory from cherry-picking the provisions of a contract that it will benefit from and ignoring other provisions that don’t benefit it or that it would prefer not to be governed by (such as an arbitration clause).”
• using the term “equitable estoppel” instead of direct benefits estoppel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).