Parker v. Center for Creative Leadership
Colorado Court of Appeals
15 P.3d 297 (2000)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
Daniel Parker (plaintiff) was an employee of U.S. West Marketing Resources Group, Inc. (West). West entered into a service agreement with the Center for Creative Leadership (Center) (defendant). Center was contracted to provide leadership-training services for West and its employees. The service agreement included an arbitration provision stating that any claim between the parties to the agreement or between one of the parties and the employees of the other party would be resolved through arbitration governed by the Federal Arbitration Act. As an employee, Parker did not personally sign the service agreement or arbitration provision. Parker suffered injuries at a corporate retreat sponsored by West and conducted by Center. Parker filed suit in Colorado state court against Center for negligence, breach of contract, and misrepresentation related to its service-agreement obligations. Center filed a motion to compel arbitration, citing the service agreement’s arbitration clause. The trial court denied the motion, finding that the arbitration clause did not apply to Parker because he never signed the service agreement. Center appealed to the Colorado appellate court, claiming that Parker was a third-party beneficiary of the agreement and bound by the arbitration clause.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dailey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 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.
