Spahr Ex Rel. Spahr v. Secco

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a court must decide an Alzheimer’s patient’s “mental incapacity defense,” even though it “naturally goes to both the entire contract and the specific agreement to arbitrate in the contract”
• “[A] fraudulent inducement claim that goes to the entire contract must be resolved by an arbitrator.” (emphasis added)
• see United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co., 363 U.S. 574, 6 Case: 19-51169 Document: 00515397461 Page: 7 Date Filed: 04/28/2020 No. 19-51169 582 (1960)
• court, not arbitrator, decides challenge based on mental capacity
• “[A] court may compel arbitration of a particular dispute under § 4 of the FAA only when satisfied that the ‘making’ of the agreement to arbitrate is not at issue.” (citing Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395, 404 (1967))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).