Legal Opinion
Thompson v. Nienaber
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided December 26, 2002No. CIVIL NO. 02-2769 (JBS)PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SIMANDLE, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs action in this Court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P, for failure to arbitrate pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16. The parties do not contest that they are subject to a binding arbitration agreement that covers this dispute. Plaintiff, however, argues that the agreement does not divest this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction to consider equitable issues raised in the arbitrable dispute. For the reasons that follow,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Diane Blair v. Scott Specialty Gases Thomas Barford Jerry StumpCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2002
- Choice Hotels International, Incorporated v. Bsr Tropicana Resort, Incorporated, a Florida Corporation Susan Hounsom Milton JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Brown v. Dorsey & Whitney, LLP.District Court, District of Columbia · 2003
- Hughes v. CACI, Inc.-CommercialDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2005
- Moore v. Ferrellgas, Inc.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2008
- Limousine Livery v. a AIRPORT LIM. SERVICELouisiana Court of Appeal · 2008
- Chapman v. Lehman Bros., Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2003
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.