Legal Opinion

Hendricks v. At & T Mobility, LLC

District Court, N.D. California

Decided October 26, 2011No. C 11-00409 CRBPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER COMPELLING ARBITRATION AND STAYING CASE

CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.

This is a purported class action against AT & T Mobility (“Defendant” or “AT & T”) relating to its billing practices. See generally Compl. (dkt. 34). Defendant has moved to compel arbitration and stay the case during arbitration, arguing that, in light of AT & T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 1740, 179 L.Ed.2d 742 (2011), Plaintiff cannot avoid arbitration. See Mot. (dkt. 35). The Court agrees.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Patrick Hendricks is an AT & T iPhone subscriber whose terms of service are…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. ByrdSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. James v. Conceptus, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2012
  2. Charlene A. Shorts v. AT&T MobilityWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API