6 results for 'cat:"Arbitration" AND cat:"Damages" AND cat:"Contract"'.
Per curiam, the Texas Supreme Court finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of a homeowner in a damages case he filed against the seller of his home. When the seller sought to initiate arbitration of the issue under the home purchase agreement, the homeowner argued that he could not be compelled to arbitrate because the cost would be unconscionable. The court of appeals held that the arbitration costs were excessive and unenforceable. As a matter of process, the homeowner should have raised the issue of costs with the arbitrator before continuing in the courts. Furthermore, the homeowner failed to show evidence of how the cost of arbitrating the issue was unreasonable but litigating the issue in court was less costly. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: 22-0830, Categories: arbitration, damages, contract
J. DeGravelles grants a request by foreign and domestic insurers, ordering a stay of a nonprofit condominium owners’ suit for recovery of repairs for wind and hailstorm damage, pending arbitration of claims. The condo owners fail to support their argument the arbitration provision is unenforceable.
Court: USDC Middle District of Louisiana, Judge: DeGravelles, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv279, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: arbitration, damages, contract
J. Hanisee finds the lower court properly granted the dealership's motion to compel arbitration. While the vehicle sales contract barred any award of punitive damages against the dealership, it was not unconscionable or unenforceable, as it allowed the buyer to pursue treble damages specified in New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act. Affirmed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Hanisee, Filed On: October 10, 2023, Case #: A-1-CA-39940, Categories: arbitration, damages, contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Montalvo denies a motion for leave to intervene after a medical company won an award in arbitration in a contract dispute with a second medical company and moved for a “writ of execution and garnishment” to retrieve its award. A financial company then filed as an intervenor, arguing it should have “priority status” to assets from that second company based on prior agreements with that company. The motion for leave should be denied because the intervenor did not timely file and because its fears that granting the writ will “impede or interfere” with its own interests are “misplaced.”
Court: USDC Western District of Texas , Judge: Montalvo, Filed On: June 5, 2023, Case #: 3:20cv7, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: arbitration, damages, contract