Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., 530 N.W.2d 790.
-
APX Construction Group, LLC, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Courts “should resolve any doubts concerning the scope of arbitrable issues in favor of arbitration.” Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., (quotation omitted).
-
Wilmington Trust, National Association,
Minn. 2023
“Determining whether a party has agreed to arbitrate a particular dispute is a matter of contract interpretation.” Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
-
Allison Schaber, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
-
Wilmington Trust, National Association, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
11, 2001); see also Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., (stating that “any doubts concerning the scope of arbitrable issues should be resolved in favor of arbitration” (citing Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp.
-
State of Minnesota, Minnesota Judicial Branch, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“Determining whether a party has agreed to ar bitrate a particular di spute is a matter of contract interpretation that [appell ate courts] review de novo.” Glacier Park Iron Ore Props., see also Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
-
Glacier Park Iron Ore Properties, LLC,
Minn. 2021
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., see First Options, 514 U.S. at 943.
-
Rashed Ferdous, et al., Respondents,
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
-
Adherent Laboratories, Inc., Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
-
Michael Bliss, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
v. Randolph , 531 U.S. 79, 89, 121 S. Ct. 513, 521 (2000); see also Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., d 790, 795 (Minn. 1995).
- KILCHER v. Dale 784 N.W.2d 866 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
-
KILCHER v. Dale
784 N.W.2d 866
Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- Cargill, Inc. v. Jorgenson Farms 719 N.W.2d 226 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
-
Cargill, Inc. v. Jorgenson Farms
719 N.W.2d 226
Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- State Ex Rel. Hatch v. Cross Country Bank, Inc. 703 N.W.2d 562 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
-
State Ex Rel. Hatch v. Cross Country Bank, Inc.
703 N.W.2d 562
Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- Community Partners Designs, Inc. v. City of Lonsdale 697 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
-
Community Partners Designs, Inc. v. City of Lonsdale
697 N.W.2d 629
Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- A.J. Lights, LLC v. Synergy Design Group, Inc. 690 N.W.2d 567 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
-
A.J. Lights, LLC v. Synergy Design Group, Inc.
690 N.W.2d 567
Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- Gale v. Rittenhouse 686 N.W.2d 50 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
-
Gale v. Rittenhouse
686 N.W.2d 50
Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Johnson v. Piper Jajfray, Inc., Ateas v. Credit Clearing Corp. of Am., 292 Minn. 334, 341 , Layne-Minnesota Co. v. Regents of Univ.
- Klinefelter v. Crum & Forster Insurance Co. 675 N.W.2d 330 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
-
Klinefelter v. Crum & Forster Insurance Co.
675 N.W.2d 330
Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- Travertine Corp. v. Lexington-Silverwood 670 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
-
Travertine Corp. v. Lexington-Silverwood
670 N.W.2d 444
Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- Onvoy, Inc. v. SHAL, LLC. 669 N.W.2d 344 Minn. 2003
-
Onvoy, Inc. v. SHAL, LLC.
669 N.W.2d 344
Minn. 2003
See Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Cincinnati Insurance Co. 666 N.W.2d 334 Minn. 2003
-
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.
666 N.W.2d 334
Minn. 2003
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Cincinnati Insurance Co. 651 N.W.2d 542 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
-
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.
651 N.W.2d 542
Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- Minnesota Teamsters Public & Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local 320 v. County of St. Louis 611 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
-
Minnesota Teamsters Public & Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local 320 v. County of St. Louis
611 N.W.2d 355
Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., , 795 *359 (Minn.1995).
- Correll v. Distinctive Dental Services, P.A. 607 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 2000
-
Correll v. Distinctive Dental Services, P.A.
607 N.W.2d 440
Minn. 2000
This analysis is also not inconsistent with our decision in Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.
- Correll v. Distinctive Dental Services, P.A. 594 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
-
Correll v. Distinctive Dental Services, P.A.
594 N.W.2d 222
Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Because the issue of whether the parties agreed to arbitrate Correll’s marital status discrimination claim is not in dispute on appeal, we go directly to the second inquiry to determine whether Correll’s claim is “within a class of claims as to which agreements to arbitrate are held unenforceable.” Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., (citation omitted).
- Manson v. Dain Bosworth Inc. 623 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
- Manson v. Dain Bosworth Inc. 623 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
- EEC Property Co. v. Kaplan 578 N.W.2d 381 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
-
EEC Property Co. v. Kaplan
578 N.W.2d 381
Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See Johnson v. Piper Jaf-fray, Inc.
- Ottman v. Fadden 575 N.W.2d 593 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
-
Ottman v. Fadden
575 N.W.2d 593
Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc., (agreement to arbitrate matter of contract interpretation); (contract interpretation subject to de novo review).
- Minnesota Community College Faculty Ass'n v. State 562 N.W.2d 685 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
-
Minnesota Community College Faculty Ass'n v. State
562 N.W.2d 685
Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Johnson v. Piper Jaffray, Inc.