Wert v. ManorCare of Carlisle PA, LLC
95 A.3d 268, 626 Pa. 114, 2014 WL 2881198, 2014 Pa. LEXIS 1558
Opinion
ORDER
AND NOW, this 24th day of June 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioners, are:
(1) Whether the Superior Court’s decision in Stewart v. GGNSC-Canonsburg, L.P., 9 A.3d 215 (Pa.Super.2010), holding that the NAF Designation voided an identical Arbi[269]*269tration Agreement, was incorrectly decided and should be reversed, where there is no evidence indicating that the NAF designation was integral to the Agreement?
(2) Whether the Court may ignore undisputed testimonial evidence that the party seeking to void the Agreement did not consider the NAF Designation to be an “integral part” of the Arbitration Agreement (because she did not read the agreement)1?
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Wert v. ManorCare of Carlisle PA, LLC, 95 A.3d 268, 626 Pa. 114, 2014 WL 2881198, 2014 Pa. LEXIS 1558 (Pa. 2014).
95 A.3d 268 (Wert v. ManorCare of Carlisle PA, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wert v. ManorCare of Carlisle PA, LLC
124 A.3d 1248 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2015)
Wisler v. Manor Care of Lancaster PA, LLC
124 A.3d 317 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2015)
Roberts, G. v. GGNSC Lancaster
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2015
Interstate Fire Protection v. Repal Construction
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2014