Summary
reviewing a motion to compel arbitration
Summary of this case from GUANG DONG LIGHT HEADGEAR FACTORY CO. v. ACI INTERNATIONALOpinion
No. 92-664.
December 7, 1992.
ORDER
C.A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 969 F. 2d 953.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Riley v. Kingsley Underwriting Agencies, Ltd.
U.S.
Dec 7, 1992
506 U.S. 1021 (1992)
Summaries of
Riley v. Kingsley Underwriting Agencies, Ltd.
U.S.
Dec 7, 1992
506 U.S. 1021 (1992)
reviewing a motion to compel arbitration
Summary of this case from GUANG DONG LIGHT HEADGEAR FACTORY CO. v. ACI INTERNATIONALnoting that the "null and void" exclusion in the Convention is to be narrowly construed and holding that agreement between British underwriters and American agent to arbitrate any dispute was not null and void since agent never pleaded that specific choice provisions at issue were obtained by fraud or coercion and the agent's claim of fraud in the inducement of the contract could be resolved by arbitral panel itself
Summary of this case from Chloe Z Fishing Co., Inc. v. Odyssey re (London) Ltd.stating that cases raised question whether a private suit under RICO may be brought against a utility to recover for excessive charges for electrical power
Summary of this case from Big Rivers Elec. Corp. v. ThorpeCase details for
Riley v. Kingsley Underwriting Agencies, Ltd.
Case Details
Full title:RILEY v. KINGSLEY UNDERWRITING AGENCIES, LTD., ET AL
Court:U.S.
Date published: Dec 7, 1992
Citations
506 U.S. 1021 (1992)
Citing Cases
Lipcon v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
See Richards v. Lloyd's of London, 135 F.3d 1289, 1292 (9th Cir. 1998). See Riley v. Kingsley Underwriting…
Women's Medical Professional v. VoinovichOnly the Fifth Circuit continues to apply Salerno in cases involving facial challenges to abortion…