Restoration Preservation Masonry, Inc. v. Grove Europe Ltd.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that inquiries into statutory jurisdiction need not precede merits inquiries and collecting cases holding the same
• noting that “[prejudice to the plaintiffs is easily inferred from the necessary expenditures” over a four-year period of active litigation
• noting that “[t]here are no per se rules,” and that belated assertions of a right to arbitrate must be assessed in “context”
• noting that rule requiring courts to address jurisdictional questions at the outset is not “absolute” outside of Article III context
• stating that there was prejudice when at least five depositions and thirteen pre-trial conferences had been held
• noting that “[a] number of circuits have allowed a non-signatory to compel arbitration” and citing many of them

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).