{"disclaimer":"This is a summary of public court records and is not legal advice. Missouri slip opinions may be modified or withdrawn; consult the official source.","party":{"slug":"joe-machens-automotive-group-inc-et-al","displayName":"Joe Machens Automotive Group, Inc., et al","totalCases":2},"cases":[{"caseId":"moappwd:wd82705:2020-04-28","opinionId":"0c3b4be3-73fc-5f57-b453-640b4557b52f","slug":"tina-and-paul-fogelsong-et-al-v-joe-machens-automotive-group-inc-et-al-d82705","caseName":"Tina and Paul Fogelsong, et al\nvs.\nJoe Machens Automotive Group Inc., et al","caseNumber":"WD82705","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2020-04-28","year":2020,"display_summary":"Plaintiffs filed a class action alleging Joe Machens Automotive Group fraudulently concealed hail damage on vehicles sold as \"factory-fresh.\" Machens moved to compel arbitration based on arbitration agreements in the Retail Buyers Orders. The circuit court denied the motion, finding the agreements unconscionable. The appellate court reversed, holding that the incorporation of American Arbitration Association (AAA) Rules in the agreements clearly and unmistakably delegated the issue of arbitrability to the arbitrator, and challenges to the arbitration agreement as a whole were for the arbitrator to decide.","primaryTopic":"contracts","topicSlugs":["contracts","civil-procedure","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"mixed","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=155437","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/tina-and-paul-fogelsong-et-al-v-joe-machens-automotive-group-inc-et-al-d82705","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"corporate","label":"Corporate Law","href":"/practice-areas/corporate","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: contracts"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/corporate"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: civil-procedure","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"},{"caseId":"moappwd:wd81202:2018-12-04","opinionId":"141f7b35-63ed-5414-83a7-30868bd2e1c0","slug":"tina-and-paul-fogelsong-et-al-v-joe-machens-automotive-group-inc-et-al-d81202","caseName":"Tina and Paul Fogelsong, et al\nvs.\nJoe Machens Automotive Group, Inc., et al","caseNumber":"WD81202","court":"moappwd","courtLabel":"Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District","decisionDate":"2018-12-04","year":2018,"display_summary":"Tina and Paul Fogelsong and others filed a class action against Joe Machens Automotive Group, alleging fraudulent vehicle sales. Joe Machens moved to compel arbitration, which the circuit court denied, finding the arbitration agreements unconscionable. On appeal, the Western District reversed and remanded, holding that a party does not waive an argument regarding an arbitration delegation provision when the law fundamentally changes during the appeal, expressly overruling prior precedent and creating a new defense. The case was remanded for the trial court to reconsider the applicability and validity of the delegation provision under the new legal standard.","primaryTopic":"civil-procedure","topicSlugs":["civil-procedure","contracts","appellate-procedure","standard-of-review"],"outcomeNorm":"remanded","officialSourceUrl":"https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=133953","detailUrl":"https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/tina-and-paul-fogelsong-et-al-v-joe-machens-automotive-group-inc-et-al-d81202","relatedPracticeAreas":[{"slug":"corporate","label":"Corporate Law","href":"/practice-areas/corporate","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: contracts"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/corporate"},{"slug":"litigation","label":"Civil Litigation","href":"/practice-areas/litigation","score":12,"source":"topic","evidence":["topic: civil-procedure","topic: appellate-procedure"],"url":"https://ott.law/practice-areas/litigation"}],"role":"respondent"}]}