Legal Opinion

Weidert v. Hanson

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 12, 2013No. 88293-2PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

¶1 A superior court purporting to act in equity refused to compel arbitration pursuant to a valid arbitration clause in a federally mandated crop insurance contract. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Weidert v. Hanson, 172 Wn. App. 106, 288 P.3d 1165 (2012). For the reasons discussed below, we grant review and reverse.

*464¶2 Through a private agent, Tim Weidert and L.W. Weidert Farms (collectively Weidert) bought a multiperil crop insurance policy for the 2009 crop year. The policy was issued by Producers Agriculture Insurance Company and reinsured by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation as…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McKee v. AT & T CORP.Washington Supreme Court · 2008
  2. McKee v. AT&T Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Satomi Owners Ass'n v. Satomi, LLCWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Saleemi v. Doctor's Associates, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2013
  5. Weidert v. HansonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Midland Farms, LLC v. United States Department of AgricultureDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2014
  2. Hudson Insurance Company v. BVB Partners, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2015

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

Powered by the Exa API