Legal Opinion · Dissent

State ex rel. Pinkerton v. Fahnestock

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 31, 2017No. SC 94822Published

1DissentLaura Denvir Stith, Judge

I dissent.

The United States Supreme Court has held, “When deciding whether the parties agreed to arbitrate a certain matter (in-eluding arbitrability), courts generally ... should apply ordinary state-law .principles that govern the formation of contracts.” First Options of Chi., Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938, 944, 115 S.Ct. 1920, 131 L.Ed.2d 985 (1995). But the Supreme Court added an important qualification “applicable when courts decide whether a party has agreed that arbitrators should decide arbi-trability: Courts should not assume that the parties agreed to arbitrate arbitrability unless…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. CardegnaSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  3. Carey Brennan v. Opus BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
  4. CONTEC CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee, v. REMOTE SOLUTION CO., LTD., Defendant-Counterclaimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
  5. Dunn Industrial Group, Inc. v. City of Sugar CreekSupreme Court of Missouri · 2003

38 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