Legal Opinion

George McNeil v. X1, Inc.

District Court, D. Kansas

Decided August 7, 2026No. 2:25-cv-02686Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS GEORGE MCNEIL, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 25-2686-EFM-ADM X1, INC., Defendant. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter comes before the Court on Defendant X1, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings (Doc. 8). Defendant seeks to enforce the Arbitration Agreement between the parties under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). Plaintiff George McNeil argues that he is no longer required to arbitrate his claim because he has already submitted it to arbitration twice and both times the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”)…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Boeing Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Pittsburg, Inc. v. Pepsico, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2005

7 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