Legal Opinion
O'QUIN v. Verizon Wireless
District Court, M.D. Louisiana
Decided February 7, 2003No. CIV.A.01-855-DPublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING AND ORDER
BRADY, District Judge.
Before the Court is Verizon Wireless’ (“Defendant”) renewed Motion for to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings (doc. 64). Shane O’Quin (“Plaintiff’) has opposed this motion, and multiple reply and response briefs have been filed. Oral arguments are not necessary, and federal subject matter jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, diversity of the parties. The facts necessary to decide this matter are relatively undisputed.
After a review of the briefs, record, and the applicable law, this Court concludes that Defendant’s Motion to Compel…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. CasarottoSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. ShuteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Perry v. ThomasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Dianne Castano v. The American Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Iberia Credit Bureau, Inc. v. Cingular Wireless LLCCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2004
- In Re Intel Corp. Microprocessor Antitrust Lit.District Court, D. Delaware · 2007
- Scott v. Cingular WirelessWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- In Re DirecTV Early Cancellation LitigationDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2010
- Rico v. Cappaert Manufactured Housing, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2005
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.