Legal Opinion
McArdle v. AT & T MOBILITY LLC
District Court, N.D. California
Decided September 14, 2009No. C 09-1117 CWPublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE ANSWER
CLAUDIA WILKEN, District Judge.
Plaintiff Steven McArdle charges Defendants AT & T Mobility LLC, New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC and New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc. with unlawfully imposing certain fees in connection with providing cellular telephone services. Defendants now move for an order compelling Plaintiff to submit his claims to binding arbitration pursuant to the terms of a service agreement between the parties. Plaintiff opposes the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. CasarottoSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Miller v. GammieCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Barnes v. AT & T Pension Benefit Plannonbargained ProgramDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2010
- Kohler v. Islands Restaurants, LPDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2012
- Kohler v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2013
- Roe v. City of San DiegoDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2013
- Polk v. Legal Recovery Law OfficesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2013
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.