Legal Opinion

Eugene Water & Elec. Bd. v. MWH Ams., Inc.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 25, 2018No. A160312PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeVORE, P.J.

*144*43This case involves the procedure to compel arbitration and the applicability of a contractual arbitration provision to defendants who are not parties to the contract. We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying petitions to arbitrate or in concluding that the arbitration provision was not applicable. We affirm.

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Contracts and Claims

The Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) entered into an agreement with MWH Americas, Inc. (MWH) for the engineering of improvements to the Leaburg Dam on the McKenzie River. In turn, MWH facilitated the bidding process…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Livingston v. METROPOLITAN PEDIATRICS, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  2. Industrial Indemnity Co. v. Wick Construction Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Industra/Matrix Joint Venture v. Pope & Talbot, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2006
  4. State v. LykinsOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Adair Homes, Inc. v. Dunn Carney Allen Higgins & Tongue, LLPCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ulrich v. General Motors, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2025
  2. Ward v. Providence St Joseph HealthDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API