Legal Opinion

DeArmond v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided December 9, 2003No. 22802PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CASTILLO, J.

{1} In this ease, we decide whether the trial court correctly determined that Plaintiff Ronald DeArmond (DeArmond) and Defendant Halliburton Energy Services, Inc., (Halliburton) entered into a valid contract agreeing to arbitrate work-related problems, thus waiving any right to a jury trial on these issues. We hold that the record is not sufficient to support the trial court’s decision, and we therefore reverse the trial court’s order granting Halliburton’s motion to compel arbitration. We remand for reconsideration of Halliburton’s motion.

I. BACKGROUND

{2} DeArmond was…

2Cases cited33 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. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. Ruesga v. Kindred Nursing Centers West, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  2. Talbott v. Roswell Hospital Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2005
  3. Salazar v. Citadel Communications Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Heimann v. Kinder-Morgan CO2 Co.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2006
  5. Mosley v. TitusDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2010

39 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