Shadduck v. Christopher J. Kaclik, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an agreement to arbitrate any disputes arising from a contract encompasses tort claims if the facts which support the tort action also support a breach of contract action
• explaining that the Shadduck Court concluded all claims were covered by unlimited arbitration agreement after determining the factual averments of the tort claims underlie the breach of contract claims and therefore are not temporally or factually distinct
• explaining that the Shadduck Court concluded all claims were covered by unlimited arbitration agreement after determining the factual averments of the tort claims underlie the breach of contract claims and therefore are not temporally or factually distinct
• explaining that the Shadduck Court concluded all claims were covered by unlimited arbitration agreement after determining the factual averments of the tort claims underlie the breach of contract claims and therefore are not temporally or factually distinct
• “As a general rule, an order denying a party’s preliminary objections is interlocutory and, thus, not (Footnote Continued Next Page
• “It is well-settled that the issue of whether a particular dispute falls within a contractual arbitration provision is a matter of law for the court to decide.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).