Under "direct benefits estoppel," although a non-signatory's claim may relate to a contract containing an arbitration provision, that relationship does not, in itself, bind the non-signatory to the arbitration provision. Instead, a non-signatory should be compelled to arbitrate a claim only if it seeks, through the claim, to derive a direct benefit from the contract containing the arbitration provision.
May 30, 2005 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania with their dedication to law.
Consulting Magazine identifies consultants that have the biggest impact on their clients, firms and the profession.
The Daily Report is honoring those attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession.
COLE SCHOTZ P.C.ENTERPRISE APPICATIONS ENGINEER: NEW JERSEY OFFICE: Prominent mid-Atlantic law firm with multiple regional office locations...
COLE SCHOTZ P.C.LITIGATION PARALEGAL - NEW JERSEY OFFICE: Prominent mid-Atlantic law firm with multiple regional office locations seeks ...
The Law Offices of Charles L. Kurmay seeks an associate attorney. While we have locations in Milford, and Madison, CT, and a presence in the...
Lawyers of Distinction would like to announce...
It is our privilege & honor to announce the addition of Steven H. Cohen, Patricia Z. Boguslawski, Evan D. Baker & Kelly A. Conlon as new partners of DAVIS, SAPERSTEIN & SALOMON, P.C.
FERRO LABELLA & WEISS LLC would like to announce that....
