McCreary Tire & Rubber Co. v. CEAT S.p.A.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
501 F.2d 1032 (1974)
- Written by Whitney Waldenberg, JD
Facts
McCreary Tire & Rubber Company (McCreary) (plaintiff), a Pennsylvania corporation, sued CEAT, S.p.A. (CEAT) (defendant), an Italian corporation, in federal district court for alleged breaches of a distributorship contract. McCreary separately sought to attach CEAT’s accounts in a local bank, and these attachments were granted. The agreement between the parties contained an arbitration clause stating that any controversies arising out of the contract were subject to arbitration in Italy. CEAT moved to stay the proceedings pending resolution of the claims through arbitration and also sought to dissolve the foreign attachment to its property in federal district court. The district court denied the motion to stay the suit and refused to dissolve the attachment. CEAT appealed. [Ed.’s note: The casebook excerpt incorrectly states that the district court granted the motion for stay.]
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gibbons, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
