Legal Opinion
Vivid Video, Inc. v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 1, 2007No. B192186PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
TURNER, P. J.
Defendants, Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. (the group), and Playboy Enterprises, Inc., purport to appeal from a June 23, 2006 “Order on Motion to Compel Arbitration.” Defendants expressly limited their motion to compel arbitration to the question whether it was for the court or the arbitrators to decide the arbitrability of the claims of plaintiffs, Vivid Video, Inc., and Vivid Video International, Inc. Defendants did not ask the trial court to decide whether any one or more of the causes of action in the complaint were subject to arbitration. Defendants argued the…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. RandolphSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Southland Corp. v. KeatingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- People v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- Lindsey v. NormetSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Century 21 Chamberlain & Associates v. HabermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Otay River Constructors v. San Diego ExpresswayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Judge v. Nijjar Realty, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
- Gastelum v. Remax International, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2016
- Garibotti v. HinkleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.