Legal Opinion
Reader v. Hirsch & Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 1, 1961PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DAWSON, District Judge.
Hirsch & Co. has brought on a motion, pursuant to section 3 of the United States Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3, to stay this action and all proceedings herein until arbitration may be had of the dispute between the parties. The claim for arbitration is founded on two agreements which provide that “any controversy [between the parties] * * * shall be settled by arbitration * * Customer’s Agreement, paragraph 16. A similar provision is found in the Guaranty of Account (“Any controversy arising between us shall be determined by arbitration * * *”). Both these agreements…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Wilko v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Brooklyn Savings Bank v. O'NeilSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Kardon v. National Gypsum Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1946
- Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington Railroad v. SchubertSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,365 Arthur Yale Kavit v. A. L. Stamm & Co., a Co Partnership, and Jack R. LevienCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Moscarelli v. StammDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1968
- United States v. Richard I. Berger, United States of America v. Richard I. BergerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Cooper v. North Jersey Trust Company of Ridgewood, NJDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1964
- Mary B. Moran v. Paine, Webber, Jackson & CurtisCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.