No. 21-1359
Robert Corliss v. Crossroads Financing, LLC, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: arbitration arbitration-waiver california-state-court contract-law contractual-rights court-inconsistency equal-treatment equal-treatment-principle litigation-conduct prejudice prejudice-standard waiver
Latest Conference:
2022-06-09
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. WHETHER "PREJUDICE" TO THE PARTY
OPPOSING ARBITRATION IS EVEN A FACTOR,
LET ALONE THE DETERMINATIVE FACTOR, A
CALIFORNIA STATE COURT OR ANY STATE OR
FEDERAL COURT MUST CONSIDER IN
DECIDING WHETHER THE PARTY MOVING TO
COMPEL ARBITRATION HAS WAIVED ITS
RIGHT TO COMPEL ARBITRATION?
2. WHETHER THIS PETITION FOR WRIT OF
CERTIORARI IS RELATED TO AND SHOULD BE
CONSOLIDATED WITH THE CASE OF MORGAN
V. SUNDANCE, INC., CASE NO. 21-328?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether prejudice is required to prove waiver of arbitration rights
Docket Entries
2022-06-13
Petition DENIED.
2022-06-01
Supplemental brief of petitioner Robert Corliss filed. (Distributed)
2022-05-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/9/2022.
2022-05-17
Waiver of right of respondent Crossroads Financing, LLC to respond filed.
2022-04-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 19, 2022)
Attorneys
Crossroads Financing, LLC
Gerald M. Serlin — BENEDON & SERLIN, LLP, Respondent
Robert Corliss
Samuel Kornhauser — Suite 1807, Petitioner