No. 18-7618
David S. Neal v. ASTA Funding, Inc.
IFP
Tags: alternative-theories arbitration arbitration-agreement civil-procedure condition-precedent contract contract-law dispute-resolution due-process non-parties non-party-enforcement standing
Key Terms:
Arbitration
Arbitration
Latest Conference:
2019-04-12
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can non-parties to a contract with an arbitration provision be compelled to arbitrate based on alternative theories when the contractual condition precedent to arbitration has not been satisfied?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED Can non-parties to a contract with an arbitration provision be compelled to arbitrate based on alternative theories when the contractual condition precedent to arbitration has not been satisfied?
Docket Entries
2019-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-03-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
2019-03-06
Brief of respondent ASTA Funding, Inc. in opposition filed.
2019-02-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 15, 2019.
2019-02-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 1, 2019 to March 15, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-01-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 1, 2019)
Attorneys
ASTA Funding, Inc.
Randy Michael Mastro — Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Respondent
David S. Neal
David S. Neal — Petitioner