Legal Opinion
Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District v. Chicago Southshore & South Bend Railroad
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided February 20, 1996No. 46A03-9506-CV-187PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BAKER, Judge.
Today we review the scope of the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction, under Indiana’s Uniform Arbitration Act (Act), 1 to review an arbitration award issued in Illinois where the parties had entered into a written agreement which provided that arbitration and any subsequent appeal would be held in Indiana. Appellant-plaintiff Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) contends that the trial court erred in granting appellee-defendant Chicago SouthShore and South Bend Railroad’s (SouthShore) motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
FACTS
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Perry v. Stitzer Buick GMC, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1994
- Kearsarge Metallurgical Corp. v. Peerless InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
- State Ex Rel. Tri-City Construction Co. v. MarshMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
- Eckart v. DavisIndiana Court of Appeals · 1994
- Tru Green Corp. v. SampsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1991
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District v. Chicago Southshore & South Bend RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
- Chicago Southshore & South Bend Railroad v. Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
- Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District v. Chicago Southshore & South Bend RailroadIndiana Court of Appeals · 1996
- Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District v. Chicago Southshore & South Bend RailroadIndiana Court of Appeals · 2001
- Chicago Southshore & South Bend R. R. v. Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation Dist.Illinois Supreme Court · 1998
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.