Legal Opinion

Schumacher Homes of Circleville v. John and Carolyn Spencer

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided April 24, 2015No. 14-0441SeparateCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Justice KETCHUM:

In recent years, the United States Supreme Court has doled out several complicated decisions construing the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16. Read together, these decisions create an eye-glazing conceptual framework for interpreting contracts with arbitration clauses that is politely described as “a tad oversubtle'for sensible application.”1 The Supreme Court sees its arbitration decisions as a series of “clear instruetion[s].” Marmet Health Care Ctr., Inc. v. Brown, — U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 1201, 1203, 182 L.Ed.2d 42 (2012). But experience suggests that the rules derived…

2Cases cited28 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. Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Southland Corp. v. KeatingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Richard Parsons v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Chesapeake Appalachia v. Cecil L. HIckman, etc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Schumacher Homes of Circleville v. John and Carolyn SpencerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2016
  4. Geological Assessment & Leasing v. Michael C. and Dierdre J. O'Hara, etc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Richard Parsons v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2016

3 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