Michael Bradley v. Harris Research, Inc.

Good Law
2001 Daily Journal DAR 13380·275 F.3d 884·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10721·2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 27284
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 28, 200100-16021California4,215 words

Opinion

Opinion

275 F.3d 884 (9th Cir. 2001) MICHAEL BRADLEY, DBA CHEM-DRY OF CAMPBELL/SARATOGA; PATRICIA SMITH BRADLEY, DBA CHEM-DRY OF CAMPBELL/SARATOGA, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, v. HARRIS RESEARCH, INC., A UTAH CORPORATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. No. 00-16021 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Argued and Submitted November 7, 2001 Filed Dec. 28, 2001 Timothy C. Houpt, Salt Lake City, Utah, for the defendant-appellant. John C. Gorman, San Jose, California, for the plaintiffs-appellees. Eric H. Karp, Boston, Massachusetts, for amicus curiae American Franchisee Association. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California James Ware, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. CV 98-21019 JW Before: John T. Noonan, Michael Daly Hawkins, and A. Wallace Tashima, Circuit Judges. TASHIMA, Circuit Judge: 1 Harris Research, Inc. ("HRI") appeals an order of the district court denying its motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case, and ordering the parties to participate in private arbitration. A franchise agreement between HRI and Appellees Michael and Patricia Bradley provided for arbitration of disputes to take place in Utah. HRI contends that the Federal…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.