Legal Opinion

Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive, Inc.

California Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 2016No. S220812PublishedCited by 81 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WERDEGAR, J.

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 arbitration, a court or the arbitrator? The question has divided the many state and federal courts to consider it.

We conclude no universal rule allocates this decision in all cases to either arbitrators or courts. Rather, who decides is in the first instance a…

2Cases cited53 opinions

  1. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. KaplanSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. LivingstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  5. Stolt-Nielsen S. A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010

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

3Cited by81 opinions

  1. Lamps Plus, Inc. v. VarelaSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
  2. Oto, L. L.C. v. KhoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
  3. JPay, Inc. v. Cynthia KobelCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018
  4. Aanderud v. Superior Court of Kern Cnty., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  5. Skot Heckman v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024

76 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