Textile Unlimited, Inc. v. A. Bmh And Company, Inc.

240 F.3d 781 (9th Cir. 2001)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Textile (P) and BMH (D) did business on 38 separate transactions. Each transaction contained an order acknowledgment and invoice from D that contained a mandatory arbitration clause with venue to be in Georgia. The clauses required P to respond in 24 hours if it did not agree. P never responded, and eventually, it got a shipment that it refused to pay for alleging that the yarn was defective. D submitted the matter to arbitration. P did not object at first but then protested, contending that the arbitration clause had not been part of their contract. P then filed an action in District Court in California. P then moved for a stay of arbitration, and the court enjoined both the pending arbitration and any further action regarding arbitration for the dispute. D appealed.