Seidman & Seidman v. Wolfson

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a no-waiver provision should not permit a party to seek judicial relief \and later to switch course and demand arbitration\
• stating purpose behind “no waiver” rule is not to allow a party to seek judicial relief of a controversy “and later to switch course and demand arbitration”
• stating purpose behind “no waiver” rule is not to allow a party to seek judicial relief of a controversy “and later to switch course and demand arbitration”
• stating purpose behind A no waiver @ rule is not to allow a party to seek judicial relief of a controversy A and later to switch course and demand arbitration @
• court applied New York law to govern contract containing choice of law provision quite similar to choice of law provision contained in the ADDS-CDT contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).