Legal Opinion

Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive, Inc.

California Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 2016No. S220812Published

1Opinion of the Court

Filed 7/28/16 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA TIMOTHY SANDQUIST, ) ) Plaintiff and Appellant, ) ) S220812 v. ) ) Ct.App. 2/7 B244412 LEBO AUTOMOTIVE, INC., et al., ) ) Los Angeles County Defendants and Respondents. ) Super. Ct. No. BC476523 ____________________________________) Plaintiff Timothy Sandquist and the various defendants here are parties to an arbitration agreement. A salient question is whether that agreement permits or prohibits arbitration on a classwide basis. Here we must answer a question one step removed—who decides whether the agreement permits or prohibits classwide…

2Cases cited54 opinions

  1. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989

49 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