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
Latest Conference:
2019-04-12
Question Presented (from Petition)
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 (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?
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