Legal Opinion

Pazol v. Tough Mudder Inc.

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided May 7, 2018No. 17–P–653PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The plaintiffs appeal from the Superior Court judgment dismissing their complaint against Tough Mudder Incorporated (Tough Mudder),3 alleging that the judge erred in allowing Tough Mudder's motion to dismiss and to compel arbitration. The plaintiffs claim that the arbitration provision contained in the parties' agreement is unenforceable and that the agreement itself is an unenforceable contract. We affirm.

Background. The record reflects the following facts. Tough Mudder is a company that organizes athletic endurance events consisting of mud-filled obstacle courses designed to test…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. CasarottoSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Augat, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  4. Hume v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  5. Marine Contractors Co. Inc. v. HurleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Pazol v. Tough Mudder Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2019
  2. Pazol v. Tough Mudder IncorporatedDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API