Legal Opinion

KENT v. DRIVETIME CAR SALES LLC

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided July 10, 2020No. 2:20-cv-02529Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ERSKINE KENT, CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff, NO. 2:20-cv-02529-KSM v. DRIVETIME CAR SALES LLC, Defendant. MEMORANDUM MARSTON, J. July 10, 2020 Plaintiff Erskine Kent brings this action against Defendant DriveTime Car Sales LLC alleging that DriveTime knowingly and fraudulently sold Kent a defective vehicle. Presently before the Court is DriveTime’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will grant DriveTime’s motion. I. Taking the facts in Kent’s complaint as true, in…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Fowler v. UPMC SHADYSIDECourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
  4. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  5. Guidotti v. Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, L.L.C.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013

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

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

Powered by the Exa API