Prentice v. Moskowitz

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that even extensive discovery into both arbitrable and non-arbitrable claims before moving to compel arbitration is insufficient prejudice for a waiver if that discovery is available for trial of the non-arbitrable claim in federal district court
• stating that the possibility that there may be some duplication from parallel proceedings is not prejudicial
• holding “[a]ny extra expense incurred as a result of [plaintiffs’] deliberate choice of an improper forum, in contravention of their contract, cannot be charged to 19 [defendant].”
• finding no prejudice resulting from extensive discovery because, inter alia, discovery would be available for trial in federal court of the nonarbitrable claim
• rejecting claim of prejudice based on extensive discovery 16 undertaken by the parties in a securities case
• insufficient prejudice to support waiver where brokerage firm delayed three-and-a-half years before seeking arbitration, filed pretrial motions, and engaged in extensive discovery

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).