Legal Opinion · Dissent

Schumacher Homes of Circleville v. John and Carolyn Spencer

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided April 24, 2015No. 14-0441Separate

1DissentLoughry, Justice

Once again, a majority of this Court reveals its biases and blatant “judicial hostility”1 toward arbitration by invalidating a plain and unmistakable agreement between the parties to arbitrate issues regarding whether a claim is subject to arbitration in the first instance. Feigning confusion about the term “arbitrability,” the majority concludes that the circuit court can decide whether the claims of the respondent homeowners, the Spencers, are subject to arbitration and then leaves untouched the circuit court’s wildly unsupported conclusion that they are not.

*349Before delving into the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Robert Lawrence Company, Inc. v. Devonshire Fabrics, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
  3. CONTEC CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee, v. REMOTE SOLUTION CO., LTD., Defendant-Counterclaimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
  4. Marmet Health Care Center, Inc. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
  5. Terminix International Co. LP v. Palmer Ranch Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2005

12 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