Momot v. Mastro

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that language delegating to arbitrators the authority to determine “the validity or application of any of the provisions of” the arbitration clause constitutes an agreement to arbitrate threshold issues concerning the arbitration agreement
• holding that a 5 clause in an arbitration agreement, which specified that “the validity or application” of 6 the agreement was to be resolved through arbitration, constituted a clear and 7 unmistakable agreement to delegate issues of arbitrability
• finding adequate a delegation clause that gave 7 “arbitrators the authority to determine ‘the validity or application of any of the provisions of’ the 8 arbitration clause”
• identifying 11 “gateway questions of arbitrability” to include “whether the parties have a valid arbitration 12 agreement or are bound by a given arbitration clause, and whether an arbitration clause in 13 a concededly binding contract applies to a given controversy”
• identifying 13 “gateway questions of arbitrability” to include “whether the parties have a valid arbitration 14 agreement or are bound by a given arbitration clause, and whether an arbitration clause in 15 a concededly binding contract applies to a given controversy”
• upholding a delegation clause providing 27 “[i]f a dispute arises out of or relates to . . . the validity or application of any of the 1 provisions of this Section 4, and, if the dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, the 2 dispute shall be resolved exclusively by binding arbitration”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).