Metropcs Communications, Inc. v. Porter

114 So. 3d 348, 2013 WL 1980724, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7829
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 15, 2013·No. No. 3D12-3077·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

The order under review denying arbitration is reversed for a determination after an evidentiary hearing of the threshold issue of whether the arbitration clause was contained in a binding agreement between the parties. See Travelers Ins. Co. v. Irby Constr. Co. 816 So.2d 829, 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Melamed, 425 So.2d 127, 129 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Krutchik v. Chase Bank USA N.A., 531 F.Supp.2d 1359, 1365 (S.D.Fla.2008). We express no view as to the result of any other issue which may arise from that ruling. See McKenzie Check Advance of Fla., LLC v. Betts, 112 So.3d 1176 (Fla.2013); Hancock v. AT & T, Inc., 701 F.3d 1248 (10th Cir.2012); Rampersad v. Primeco Personal Commc’ns, L.P., 2001 WL 34872572 (S.D.Fla.2001); Schafer v. AT & T Wireless Servs., Inc., 2005 WL 850459 (S.D.Ill. 2005); Briceno v. Sprint Spectrum, L.P., 911 So.2d 176, 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Metropcs Communications, Inc. v. Porter, 114 So. 3d 348, 2013 WL 1980724, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7829 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

114 So. 3d 348 (Metropcs Communications, Inc. v. Porter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Metropcs Communications v. Jorge Porter
273 So. 3d 1025 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)
Metropcs Communications, Inc. v. Porter
225 So. 3d 843 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)