Legal Opinion
In Re Scott
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided February 27, 2003No. 2-01-161-CVPublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SAM J. DAY, Justice.
I. Introduction
In this original proceeding, we must decide whether the trial court erred by denying relator Zachary C. Scott’s motion to compel arbitration. Because we conclude that the trial court erred by denying the motion, we conditionally grant the writ of mandamus.
II. Background Information
At the time the facts underlying this original proceeding occurred, Scott and Robert Truelson, the real party in interest, were both stockbrokers and registered financial advisors. 1 They were employed by Prudential Securities, which is a “member” of the National Association…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. TippsTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Litton Financial Printing Div., Litton Business Systems, Inc. v. NLRBSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Texas Utilities Electric Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1999
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Wachovia Securities, LLC v. Emery, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2005
- Wee Tots Pediatrics, P.A. v. MorohunfolaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2008
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Lockey Investment Group, L.L.C., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2006
- In Re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2004
- Stanford Group Co. v. Tidwell, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2008
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.