ALLTEL CORPORATION V. ROSENOW

Docket NumberNo. CV-13-995
Decision Date18 September 2014
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
9 cases
  • GGNSC Holdings, LLC v. Lamb
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 10 mars 2016
    ... ... Chappel, 2014 Ark. 545, 453 S.W.3d 645 (citing Alltel Corp. v. Sumner, 360 Ark. 573, 203 S.W.3d 77 (2005) ). The circuit court found that Lamb's and ... See, e.g., Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow, 2014 Ark. 375, 2014 WL 4656609 (citing AT & T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion , 563 U.S. 333, 131 ... ...
  • Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. v. Walker
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 17 mars 2016
    ... ... You will not claim that we waived our right to insist on proper performance. Citing Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow, 2014 Ark. 375, 2014 WL 4656609, the court concluded that there was no mutual ... ...
  • EBF Partners, LLC v. Letha's Pies, LLC
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • 28 avril 2021
    ... ... Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow , 2014 Ark. 375, 2014 WL 4656609. We are not bound by the circuit court's ... ...
  • Jorja Trading, Inc. v. Willis
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • 28 novembre 2018
    ... ... Carter v. Four Seasons Funding Corp. , 351 Ark. 637, 97 S.W.3d 387 (2003). "We are not bound by the circuit court's decision, but in ... is the fact that in one of the most cited Arkansas cases regarding mutuality of obligation, Alltel Corporation v. Rosenow , 2014 Ark. 375, 2014 WL 4656609, the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed a ... ...
  • Get Started for Free
2 firm's commentaries
  • The Supreme Court and President Trump Agree -- Nursing Homes Plaintiffs May Be Required to Arbitrate
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 20 juin 2017
    ...under a state constitution or as lacking mutuality or any other basic contract defense is not allowed. Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow, 2014 Ark. 375, 2014 WL 4656609 (Ark. 2014) (finding the clause invalid for lack of In Kindred Nursing Centers Ltd. P'ship v. Clark, the Supreme Court's decision wa......
  • Supreme Court Reaffirms State Courts Must Enforce Arbitration Provisions
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 16 juin 2017
    ...federal law interpreting the FAA is also applicable in state and federal courts. Shawn Doorhy Blake Angelino Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow, 2014 Ark. 375, 2014 WL 4656609 (Ark. 2014) (finding the “doctrine of mutuality” applies to all contracts and, therefore, the arbitration clause at issue was ......
5 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Consumer Protection Law Developments (Second) - Volume II
    • 2 février 2016
    ...App. Div. 1983), 1040 Allstate Ins. Co. v. Icon Health & Fitness, 361 F. Supp. 2d 673 (E.D. Mich. 2005), 942 Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow, 2014 Ark. 375 (Ark. 2014), 756 Alpo Petfoods, Inc. v. Ralston Purina Co., . 913 F.2d 958 (D.C. Cir. 1990), order modified, 1991 WL 25793 (D.D.C. Feb. 8, 1991......
  • Chapter 9 Standards of Review on Appeal
    • United States
    • Invalid date
    ...a Motion to Compel Arbitration An appellate court reviews a circuit court order denying arbitration de novo. Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow, 2014 Ark. 375. But absent "a showing that the circuit court erred in its interpretation of the law," the reviewing court "will accept its decision as correct......
  • State Consumer Protection Laws
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Consumer Protection Law Developments (Second) - Volume II
    • 2 février 2016
    ...Act, because the transactions did not involve interstate commerce,” and that finding was not challenged on appeal. Id . at 450 n.1. 359. 2014 Ark. 375 (Ark. 2014). 360. 9 U.S.C. § 1, et seq. 361. 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011). Position 80 1602567 ABA-tx-Consumer Vol2 16-03-28 16:23:46 STATE CONSUM......
  • Arkansas
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Premium Library State Consumer Protection Law
    • 7 mai 2022
    ...Act, because the transactions did not involve interstate commerce,” and that finding was not challenged on appeal. Id . at 450 n.1. 98. 2014 Ark. 375. 99. 9 U.S.C. § 1, et seq. 100. 563 U.S. 333 (2011). 101. Alltel, 2014 Ark. at *10-11. 102. Id . at *11 n.7 (citing Enderlin v. XM Satellite ......
  • Get Started for Free

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT