Skip to main content
Skip to content
1 duplicate copy in the archive
Title Match
Case File
sd-10-EFTA01368179Dept. of Justice

EFTA Document EFTA01368179

Other

Page 6 of 32 trial. Mitchell v. Kindred Healthcare Operating, Inc., 349 S.W.3d 492, 496 (Tenn. Ct App. 2008). As vie observed in Rosenberg v. BlueCross BlueShield of Tenn.. Inc., 219 S.W.3d 892, 903-04 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006). La's a general rule, a courts enforcement of an arbitration provision is reviewed de novo. See Cooper v. MRM Inv. Co.. 367 F.3d 493, 497 (6th Cir. 2004). A trial courts order on a motion to compel arbitration addresses itself primarily to the application of contract law.

Date
Unknown
Source
Dept. of Justice
Reference
sd-10-EFTA01368179
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
Loading document viewer...

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,800+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, donor-supported, and independent. Donors see no ads.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.