Mas v. Metropolitan Dade County

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[m]otions to compel arbitration are treated either as motions to dismiss or motions for summary judgment.”
• remanding to the district court “to allow the parties to conduct discovery limited to the issue of arbitrability” because plaintiffs “brought forth sufficient facts to place the agreement to arbitrate in issue” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• ruling on the “‘who decides’ question”
• “It was . . . the District Court’s view that adhering to Guidotti was a waste of time. That was error . . . .”
• “If the statute’s plain language is unambiguous and expresses Congress’s intent with sufficient precision, we need not look further” (quotation omitted).
• “If the statute's plain language is unambiguous and expresses Congress's intent with sufficient precision, we need not look further.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).