Legal Opinion

24 Hour Fitness, Inc. v. Superior Court of Sonoma Cty.

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 28, 1998No. A079501, A079502PublishedCited by 109 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CORRIGAN, J.

The case revolves around an issue of first impression: May a plaintiff who sues multiple defendants avoid summary judgment against all by establishing that at least some defendants do not have a right to compel arbitration? She may not.

Sierra Munshaw sued her former employer, 24 Hour Fitness, Inc., doing business as 24 Hour Nautilus (Nautilus), and various Nautilus employees, for causes of action arising from alleged sexual harassment in the workplace. The defendants sought summary judgment on the ground that Munshaw had agreed with Nautilus to arbitrate all claims. The…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  2. College Hospital, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Stirlen v. Supercuts, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1997
  4. Neal v. State Farm Insurance CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  5. Brookwood v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996

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

3Cited by109 opinions

  1. Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Pinnacle Museum Tower Ass'n v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Oto, L. L.C. v. KhoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
  4. Szetela v. Discover BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  5. Tiffany D. Shaw v. Autozone, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999

104 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