Legal Opinion

Mattingly v. Hughes Electronics Corp.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 4, 2002No. 2169, Sept. Term, 2001PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ADKINS, Judge.

In an effort to initiate a class action lawsuit, John A. Mattingly, Sr., appellant, sued DIRECTV, Inc. and its parent company, Hughes Electronics Corporation (“Hughes”), appel-lees, for charging an illegal $2.81 late fee to his account for satellite television services. The Circuit Court for St. Mary’s County agreed with DIRECTV and Hughes that Mattingly is bound by an arbitration clause that DIRECTV inserted into its standard “Customer Agreement” approximately one month after Mattingly subscribed to its service, and dismissed the complaint without prejudice, to allow…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. ShuteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Badie v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  4. ProCD, Inc. v. ZeidenbergCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
  5. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. DirecTV, Inc. v. MattinglyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  2. Maryland Transportation Authority Police Lodge 34 v. Maryland Transportation AuthorityCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010
  3. Union Planters Bank, Nat. Ass'n v. RogersMississippi Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Thompson v. WitherspoonCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  5. In re Samsung Galaxy Smartphone Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig.District Court, N.D. California · 2018

5 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