Case Citator › Simply Wireless, Inc. v. T-Mobile US, Inc.

Simply Wireless, Inc. v. T-Mobile US, Inc.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Fourth Circuit
Citation
877 F.3d 522
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
30 of 30
Citing cases (total)
30
Treatment dates
2019
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. Simply Wireless, Inc. v. T-Mobile US, Inc. was abrogated in part by Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc.; all 30 flagged citations have been read. Schein rejected the rule allowing a court to decide an arbitrability question despite a contractual delegation when the argument for arbitration is “wholly groundless.” Simply Wireless had recognized that exception.
More on how this was screened

Its separate holding that incorporating JAMS rules can clearly delegate arbitrability survived, and later courts continued to apply it. The confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

30 later cases cite Simply Wireless, Inc. v. T-Mobile US, Inc.; 30 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Simply Wireless, Inc. v. T-Mobile US, Inc.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Supreme Court rejected the “wholly groundless” exception to delegated arbitrability that Simply Wireless had recognized.

    Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    In light of disagreement in the Courts of Appeals over whether the “wholly groundless” exception is consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act, we granted certiorari, 585 U. S. ___ (2018). Compare 878 F. 3d 488 (CA5 2017) (case below); Simply Wireless, Inc. v. T-Mobile US, Inc., 877 F. 3d 522 (CA4 2017); ... We conclude that the “wholly groundless” exception is inconsistent with the text of the Act and with our precedent.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Simply Wireless, Inc. v. T-Mobile US, Inc. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace