Opinion No. 71-298 (1971) Ag

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a party properly raised its challenge to a delegation provision by directly challenging it in its opposition to the motion to compel arbitration
• determining that, because party had “directly challenged the delegation clause” in response to the motion to compel, court had jurisdiction to consider such challenge
• noting that, “if we determine that the delegation clause is itself invalid or unenforceable,” we “may . . . review the enforceability of the arbitration agreement as a whole”
• noting that “[w]hen the syntax involves something other than a parallel series of nouns or verbs, a prepositive or postpositive modifier normally applies to only the nearest reasonable referent”
• declining to enforce a delegation clause and an arbitration agreement because the arbitral forum provided for in the arbitration agreement does not exist
• refusing to enforce arbitration agreement where selected forum was not available, and where the selection was integral to the parties’ agreement to arbitrate

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).