Legal Opinion
Penberthy v. AT & T Wireless Services, Inc.
District Court, M.D. Florida
Decided February 4, 2005No. 8:04-cv-02091PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
LAZZARA, District Judge.
Before the Court are Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Memorandum of Law (Dkt. 10), Plaintiffs’ Opposition (Dkt. 25), and Defendant’s Reply Brief. (Dkt. 28). After careful consideration of the submissions of the parties, the Court concludes that the arbitration should be compelled.
Nature of this Suit
Colette Penberthy and her parents, Doreen and Richard Penberthy, bring this lawsuit against Defendant for multiple violations of 47 U.S.C. § 222 of the Federal Communications Act (FCA), which section protects customer proprietary network information (CPNI).…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Green Tree Financial Corp. v. BazzleSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. v. BookSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Jonah P. Anders, and All Others Similarly Situated v. Hometown Mortgage Services, Inc., Mortgage Brokers Group of TuscaloosaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lozano v. AT & T Wireless Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. CCT Communications, Inc. (In Re CCT Communications, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- Lozano v. At&t WirelessCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007