ALLTEL CORPORATION V. ROSENOW
| Docket Number | No. CV-13-995 |
| Decision Date | 18 September 2014 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
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
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
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
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
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
Start Your 7-day Trial
9 cases
-
GGNSC Holdings, LLC v. Lamb
... ... 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
... ... 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
... ... Alltel Corp. v. Rosenow , 2014 Ark. 375, 2014 WL 4656609. We are not bound by the circuit court's ... ...
-
Jorja Trading, Inc. v. Willis
... ... 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
...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
...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
...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
...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
...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
...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