Legal Opinion

Stasz v. Schwab

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 5, 2004No. B159163, B162829, B163456PublishedCited by 9 opinions

[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MALLANO, J.

In these three consolidated appeals, plaintiff Shanel Stasz seeks to avoid the effect of an arbitration provision contained in a settlement agreement to which she and defendant Hugo Quackenbush are parties. We reject all of Stasz’s contentions and affirm.

Disagreements arose between Stasz and Quackenbush that were settled by way of a written agreement negotiated by their respective counsel. The agreement mandated the arbitration of all subsequent disputes before the American Arbitration Association (AAA). Disputes later arose. Instead of initiating arbitration, Stasz filed a…

2Cases cited56 opinions

  1. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Mireles v. WacoSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Bradley v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  4. Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Greenspan v. LADT, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  2. Lambert v. CARNEGHICalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  3. La Serena Properties, LLC v. WeisbachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  4. Morgan Phillips, Inc. v. JAMS/Endispute, L.L.C.California Court of Appeal · 2006
  5. Pullara v. AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOC. INC., Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2006

4 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