Legal Opinion

Deutsch v. Long Island Carpet Cleaning Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided November 15, 1956PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

The arbitration clause included among the conditions set forth on the reversed side of the receipt given by this carpet-cleaning company to the customer is lacking in mutuality. While the customer’s claims are required to be arbitrated, the company’s claim for money due is at its sole option litigable in the courts. Parties may, of course, expressly agree that only certain types of controversies between them shall be arbitrated. Here, however, we have a company engaged in furnishing services to retail customers unilaterally inserting an arbitration clause on the reversed side of a receipt.…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Sablosky v. Edward S. Gordon Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. Kalman Floor Co., Inc. v. Jos. L. Muscarelle, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1984
  3. Hull Dye & Print Works, Inc. v. Riegel Textile Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1971
  4. R.W. Roberts Construction Co. v. St. Johns River Water Management District ex rel. McDonald Electric & Repair Service, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
  5. Deutsch v. Long Island Carpet Cleaning Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1957

3 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