Legal Opinion
Araim v. Painewebber, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Georgia
Decided June 22, 1988No. 2:88-cv-00073PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
FORRESTER, District Judge.
This securities action is before the court on the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and to stay court proceedings and on the defendants’ motion for leave to file a supplemental brief in support of that motion. The latter motion is unopposed and is therefore GRANTED. Because the court is unwilling to anticipate the demise of Wilko v. Swan, 346 U.S. 427, 74 S.Ct. 182, 98 L.Ed. 168 (1953), as more fully discussed below, the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and to stay proceedings will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
The plaintiff’s complaint,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Shearson/American Express Inc. v. McMahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Wilko v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Hardwick v. BowersCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- Indianapolis Airport Authority v. American Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Chang v. LinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Elliott v. AlbrightCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Sacco v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988