Legal Opinion

Bates v. Laminack

District Court, S.D. Texas

Decided September 3, 2013No. Civil Action No. 2:12-CV-387PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER ON MOTIONS TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

NELVA GONZALES RAMOS, District Judge.

Before the Court are two motions to compel arbitration (D.E. 60, 62) filed by the O’Quinn Defendants1 and Defendant T. Gerald Treece,2 jointly referred to as “Movants.” Defendants Richard N. Laminack, Buffy Martines, and Thomas W. Pirtle filed a consent to arbitration (D.E. 63), claiming that the arbitration agreement in the Power of Attorney and Contingent Fee Contracts on which Movants rely apply equally to the claims made against them because they are sued as employees of O’Quinn. The remaining Defendant, Abel…

2Cases cited57 opinions

Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. RandolphSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. CardegnaSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
Perry v. ThomasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

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

3Cited by1 opinion

Spark Connected, LLC v. Semtech CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 2020