Sap Am., Inc. v. Versata Software, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming the district court’s finding that the non-signatory employer failed to set forth any evidence that it reasonably relied on, or even knew about, the arbitration agreement as required by Wisconsin contract law
• finding waiver of alternative grounds to compel arbitration that were not timely raised
• applying Wisconsin law and its similar detrimental reliance requirement to reject application of equitable estoppel to require plaintiff to arbitrate with non-signatory to arbitration agreement in the absence of any evidence that the non-signatory even knew about the arbitration agreement
• “[a]rbitrability of a dispute is often a question of law that does not depend on undisputed facts”
• \[S]tate law governs whether a contract with an arbitration agreement is enforceable[.]\ (citing Arthur Andersen LLP v. Carlisle, 556 U.S. 624, 631 (2009))
• “The well-established rule in th[e Seventh] Circuit is that a plaintiff waives the right to argue an issue on appeal if she fails to raise the issue before a lower court.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).