Little v. Pullman

Opinion

CHANEY, J.

In prior proceedings, the superior court denied defendant David Pullman’s motion to compel arbitration under an arbitration clause in a, 2005 agreement. We affirmed the ruling on the ground that a later agreement between the parties, which contained no arbitration provision, superseded the 2005 agreement. (Little v. Pullman (May 19, 2011, B221565) [nonpub. opn.].) Soon after our decision was filed, Pullman ventured unilaterally to rescind the later agreement. He then moved a second time to compel arbitration under the 2005 agreement, arguing rescission of the later agreement…