A collection of the most recent U.S. international arbitration decisions is available here. Decisions can be quickly retrieved by using the filter tools below.
-
Hunsinger v. Carr, No. 2:14-CV-02302-RK (E.D. Pa. May 24, 2016)05/24/2016
Complaint to confirm FINRA arbitration award granted as there was no basis to vacate, modify or correct it. Court has diversity jurisdiction over subject matter because FAA applies to arbitrations involving interstate commerce, including securities at issue.
-
Neurosigma, Inc., v. De Salles, No. 2:13-CV-07973-DMG-PJW (C.D. Cal. May 24, 2016)05/24/2016
Court enters judgment pursuant to prior decision to grant defendant’s motion to confirm AAA arbitration award.
-
Goldman Sachs Bank USA v. Moreno, No. 6:15-CV-020188-RFD-CBW (W.D. La. May 24, 2016)05/24/2016
Court denies motion to compel arbitration and motion for leave to file an amended motion to compel arbitration. The action in dispute does not fall within the scope of the arbitration clauses at issue because under Louisiana law an “executory process” it is not a “court trial” or “trial by jury,” which is what the parties waived in favor of arbitration.
-
White v. Sunoco Inc., No. 2:15-CV-04595-PD (E.D. Pa. May 24, 2016)05/24/2016
Motion to compel arbitration and stay litigation denied. Defendant failed to establish that as a non-signatory it could compel enforcement of the arbitration agreement contained in a cardholder agreement that governs plaintiff’s relationship with its bank and is not intertwined with the use of defendant’s rewards credit card.
-
Avery v. Bagnato, Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-00161-LAP (S.D.N.Y. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Court denied motion to vacate arbitral award, finding that motion was untimely pursuant to the FAA § 12 which provides that a motion to vacate cannot be filed outside the three-month limitation period.
-
Salas v. Anheuser-Busch Sales of South Bay, Inc., No. 14–55748 (9th Cir. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Appellate court reverses district court’s order compelling arbitration because the collective bargaining agreement does not “clearly and unmistakably” require arbitration of statutory discrimination claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.
-
Cline v. Etsy, No. 2:15-CV-2115 (JCM) (VCF) (D. Nev. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Court grants motion to compel arbitration and stays the action pending outcome of the arbitration. Court adopts magistrate judge’s findings that the plaintiff maintained an account with defendant, accepted its terms of use agreement that contained a binding and valid arbitration provision that survived the termination of the agreement.
-
McKool Smith, P.C. v. Curtis Int’l Ltd., No. 15-11140 (5th Cir. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Appellate court affirms district court’s confirmation of plaintiff’s arbitration award and denial of defendant’s counter-motion to vacate the award. Court held that plaintiff’s argument, that previously recognized non-statutory grounds for vacatur (i.e. manifest disregard for Texas law and violation of Texas public policy) should be recognized as statutory grounds for vacatur under the FAA, need not be reached when plaintiff failed to show sufficient grounds to overcome the court’s deferential standard of review.
-
Pasi of LA, Inc. v. Harry Pepper & Assoc., Inc., No. 1:15-CV-0369HSO-JCG (S.D. Miss. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Motion to stay proceedings pending related litigation and arbitration granted pursuant to the court’s inherent authority to control its docket rather than pursuant to 9 USC § 3. Court held that the instant action could not be litigated until a related AAA arbitration was resolved and a pending ruling on the issue of arbitrability was decided by another court in the first instance.
-
Muckle v. Healthcare Support Staffing, Inc., No. 6:15-CV-1391-Orl-28TBS (M.D. Fla. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Motion to compel arbitration denied. Arbitration agreement was invalid because it was not signed by an agent of the defendant and the conduct of the defendant did not demonstrate an assent to arbitrate. Even if the arbitration agreement were valid, the plaintiff waived his right to arbitration by commencing two lawsuits covered by the agreement.
-
Jock v. Sterling Jewelers, Inc., No. 1:08-CV-02875-JSR (S.D.N.Y. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Motion to vacate an arbitrator’s conditional certification award and tolling order denied as the court lacks jurisdiction to review arbitrator’s non-final orders.
-
Bruster v. Uber Tech. Inc., No. 1:15-CV-02653-JG (N.D. Ohio May 23, 2015)05/23/2016
Motion to compel arbitration and dismiss action granted. Plaintiff failed to establish procedural unconscionability in the formation of the arbitration agreement’s delegation of arbitrability to the arbitrator.
-
Racey v. Jay-Jay Cabaret, Inc., No. 1:15-CV-08228-KPF (S.D.N.Y. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Court grants plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification of collective action and notice to be sent to prospective collection action members over defendants’ challenges, including a claim that certain members of the putative collective action are bound by arbitration agreement that bar them from participating. Court held that it may have to evaluate the validity of any purported arbitration agreements, but that such inquiry does not prevent conditional certification or notice at this stage.
-
Sullivan v. PJ United Inc., No. 15-13114 (11th Cir. May 23, 2016)05/23/2016
Judgment of district court affirmed; the arbitration agreement expressly delegated to the arbitrator issues concerning enforceability of the agreement and arbitrator construed the contract after excising the class arbitration waiver.
-
Geter v. Magnolia Manor of Columbia, No. 16-1050 (4th Cir. May 20, 2016)05/20/2016
Appellate court affirms district court order, finding no reversible error in order granting the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s employment discrimination action.
-
Capstone Associated Servs., Ltd. v. Organizational Strategies, Inc., No. H-15-3233 (S.D. Tex. May 20, 2016)05/20/2016
Defendant’s motion for reconsideration of court order granting plaintiff’s motion to compel arbitration denied. Court held that another court’s decision did not have preclusive effect on the court’s decision that the arbitrator should determine the arbitrability of whether various affirmative defenses were waived in the parties’ mediation settlement agreement.
-
Ellison v. Canton Long Term Care, LLC, No. 2:15-CV-01650-JRG-RSP (E.D. Tex. May 20, 2016)05/20/2016
Motion to compel arbitration denied. A valid arbitration agreement did not exist between the parties because the arbitration agreement could be unilaterally changed by the petitioner and was therefore an illusory agreement.
-
21st Century Fin. Servs., LLC v. Manchester Fin. Bank, 3:15-CV-01848-BTM-BGS (S.D. Cal. May 19, 2016)05/19/2016
In an action to enforce a confirmed arbitration award, court denies plaintiff’s motion to add judgment debtors. Court held that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction to enforce a judgment against non-diverse parties under an alter-ego theory of liability.
-
Malik v. F-19 Holdings, LLC, No. 5:15-CV-130-KKC (E.D. Ky. May 19, 2016)05/19/2016
Motion to compel arbitration granted. Court held that the FAA compels arbitration of plaintiff’s class action Telephone Consumer Protection Act claims because the agreement between the parties includes a broad arbitration clause and the claim falls within the scope of that clause.
-
Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters v. Drywall Dynamics, Inc., No. 14-55250 (9th Cir. May 19, 2016)05/19/2016
District court’s order vacating an arbitration award reversed. Court held that the district court exceeded its narrow authority when it found that the arbitrator’s interpretation of the parties’ agreement was implausible and contrary to public policy. The district court erred by evaluating the arbitrator’s interpretation, which was arguably based on the contract.
-
Ideal Co., Inc. v. 1st Merch. Funding, LLC, 2:15-cv-07256-RSWL-GJS (C.D. Cal. May 18, 2016)05/18/2016
Motion to dismiss granted since all claims asserted are arbitrable. While 9 USC § 3 provides that courts are to stay proceedings until arbitration has been completed, circuit courts, including the ninth circuit, have held that district courts may order dismissal when all the claims are barred by the arbitration clause.
-
Gingras v. Rosette, Case No. 5:15-CV-101 (D. Vt. May 18, 2016)05/18/2016
Motions to compel arbitration denied. Court held that the court, not the arbitrator, should decide the validity of the arbitration clause because the clause does not explicitly delegate authority to the arbitrator and instead sends questions related to arbitrability of class action claims to the tribal court. Additionally, an attack on the delegation clause as unconscionable should be addressed by the court. The court also held that though the arbitration agreement states it is subject to tribal law, the lack of any relevant tribal law on arbitrability of disputes militates for the application of Vermont law.
-
Henry v. New Orleans Louisiana Saints L.L.C., No. 2:15-CV-05971-CJB-JCW (E.D. La. May 18, 2016)05/18/2016
Motion to compel arbitration granted and action stayed pending outcome of the arbitration. Court found that a valid arbitration agreement existed, noting that ambiguous language does not necessarily render it unenforceable. Additionally, since plaintiff failed to show that the arbitrator’s relationship with defendants was undisclosed, unanticipated, or unintended, the appropriate method for contesting any possible bias is through judicial review of the ensuing arbitration award.
-
Davis v. BSH Home Appliances Corp., No. 4:15-CV-103-FL (E.D.N.C. May 18, 2016)05/18/2016
Motion to compel arbitration granted. The court held that the parties’ valid arbitration agreement included the dispute in its scope and reference to the AAA arbitration rules was a clear and unmistakable delegation of arbitrability to the arbitrator.
-
Mitchell v. EEG, Inc., No. 3:15-CV-00903-JHM-DW (W.D. Ky. May 18, 2016)05/18/2016
Motion to compel arbitration granted in part and denied in part. The existence of a delegation clause is clear and unmistakable evidence that parties agreed to submit issues of arbitrability to the arbitral tribunal. However, since one of the plaintiffs alleged her signature was forged the court retained the action on a limited basis and ordered discovery to decide whether an agreement was formed in the first place.
-
EEOC v. PJ Utah, LLC, No. 15-4079 (10th Cir. May 18, 2016)05/18/2016
Appeal of the district court’s order compelling arbitration dismissed. Since the order compelling arbitration did not dispose of all claims by all parties, and therefore does not constitute a final decision, the appellate court lacked jurisdiction over that order.
-
Orange Middle East & Africa v. Republic of Equatorial Guinea, No. 1:15-CV-00849-RMC (D.D.C. May 18, 2016)05/18/2016
Petition to enforce arbitration award dismissed without prejudice. Court held that proper service was never effected on the respondent foreign state, as required by 28 USC § 1608, since an agreement between the parties about the exchanging of notices was not a “special arrangement for service” as required by the FSIA’s strict service requirements.
-
Aiton v. Verizon New Jersey, Inc., No. 3:15-CV-06533-MAS-TJB (D.N.J. May 17, 2016)05/17/2016
Motion to dismiss and compel arbitration granted. A valid arbitration agreement existed and the claim falls within the scope of the arbitration clause.
-
Solo v. American Association of University Women, No. 3:15-CV-01356-WQH-JMA (S.D. Cal. May 17, 2016)05/17/2016
Motion to compel arbitration denied. The arbitration agreement was procedurally unconscionable because it was drafted by the party with the stronger bargaining power, did not provide a meaningful choice, and did not reference the relevant arbitration rules or discuss costs. The court also held the agreement was substantively unconscionable because it was unreasonably favorable to the defendant with no justification for its one-sided nature.
-
Komatsu v. NTT Data, Inc., No. 1:15-CV-07007-LGS (S.D.N.Y. May 17, 2016)05/17/2016
In dismissing the complaint, court held that the plaintiff was estopped from avoiding arbitration with a non-signatory party when the plaintiff’s services were provided to the non-signatory party pursuant to the contract containing the arbitration agreement. Additionally, a federal court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over a petition to compel arbitration after a state court has already ruled on the merits of that petition.
-
Monadnock Construction, Inc. v. Westchester Fire Insurance Co., No. 1:16-CV-00420-JBW-VMS (E.D.N.Y. May 17, 2016)05/17/2016
Action stayed since pending arbitration between parties covered aspects of the court action. Court requested that the arbitrators expedite the proceedings and stated that the magistrate judge may lift the stay to help the parties seek discovery in aid of the arbitration.
-
Highland TH, LLC v. City of Terre Haute, No. 2:15-CV-00196-JMS-DKL (S.D. Ind. May 17, 2016)05/17/2016
Motion to dismiss and to compel arbitration granted. Court held that claims of tortious interference arose from or were in connection with a contract to which a valid arbitration agreement applied.
-
GSS Group Ltd. v. National Port Authority of Liberia, No. 14-7041 (D.C. Cir. May 17, 2016)05/17/2016
District court dismissal of petition to confirm arbitral award affirmed. Court held that district court was correct in dismissing petitioner’s second attempt to confirm the same arbitral award because the issue of personal jurisdiction could not be re-litigated. Court further held that the FSIA arbitration exception did not give the district court subject matter jurisdiction over a claim against Liberia itself because the petitioner could demonstrate neither that the port authority was Liberia’s agent nor that treating it as a legally separate entity would perpetuate fraud or injustice.
-
Hedrick v. BNC Nat’l Bank, No. 2:15-CV-09358-JAR (D. Kan. May 16, 2016)05/16/2016
Motion to compel arbitration granted and action stayed. Arbitrator must decide the question of whether the arbitration clause allows for class arbitration because the parties agreed to conduct arbitration under AAA arbitration rules, which empower arbitrator to decide questions of arbitrability.
-
Data Processing Sciences Corp. v. Lumenate Technologies, L.P., No. 1:16-CV-00387-TSB (S.D. Ohio May 16, 2016)05/16/2016
Motion to vacate or modify the arbitration award granted in part and denied in part. In vacating part of the award, the court held that the arbitrator exceeded his authority in deciding a counterclaim that arose out of a different but related contract to which the arbitration agreement did not apply. The award was enforceable as to the issues that drew their “essence” from the contract containing the arbitration agreement.
-
Danley v. Encore Capital Group, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-11535-GCS-EAS (E.D. Mich. May 16, 2016)05/16/2016
Motion to compel arbitration and dismiss action without prejudice granted. Court held that challenges to the arbitration agreements were delegated to the arbitrator.
-
Praxis Capital & Investment Management Ltd. v. Gemini Holdings I, LLC, No. 2:15-CV-02912-ALM-KAJ (S.D. Ohio May 16, 2016)05/16/2016
Motion to compel arbitration denied. The purported arbitration agreement did not require arbitration and therefore was not mandatory.
-
JPAY, Inc. v. Kobel, No. 1:16-CV-20121-DPG (S.D. Fla. May 16, 2016)05/16/2016
Motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings denied in part. Court held that the differences between class and bilateral arbitration are of enough consequence that the determination of whether class arbitration is available is a substantive question of arbitrability for the court to decide absent clear and unmistakable evidence that the parties intended otherwise.
-
Preferred Care, Inc. v. Howell, No. 7:16-CV-00013-ART-EBA (E.D. Ky. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
Court granted in part and denied in part defendant’s motion to dismiss. Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ attempt to compel arbitration regarding wrongful death claims where the arbitration agreement is not enforceable against the wrongful-death beneficiaries who were not bound by the agreement. Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss with respect to the plaintiffs’ remaining claims, as plaintiffs’ arbitration agreement is valid and enforceable with respect to the remaining claims defendant brought in his state court complaint.
-
BCB Holdings Limited v. Government of Belize, No. 15-7063 (D.C. Cir. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
District court judgment enforcing arbitral award affirmed. The Government of Belize failed to provide support for its assertion that the doctrine of international comity is a “rule of procedure” of the US, as provided for in the New York Convention. Additionally, the public policy interest in international comity does not present a clear-cut case under the New York Convention where enforcement would violate basic notions of morality and justice. Further, in view of the circumstances presented, the district court’s equitable tolling of the requirement under 9 USC § 207 to enforce an arbitral award within three years was appropriate.
-
U-Save Auto Rental of America, Inc. v. Barton, No. 3:15-CV-00348-DPJ-FKB (S.D. Miss. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
Motion to correct judgment as to prejudgment interest under FRCP Rule 60(a) denied. Setting an earlier accrual date for calculating prejudgment interest was not a clerical-type correction as envisioned by FRCP Rule 60(a), but was a modification of the arbitration award that would require findings of law and fact.
-
Parton v. FCA US LLC, No. 5:15-CV-00262 (W.D. Okla. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
Motion to compel arbitration denied. Arbitration agreement requiring car purchasers to pay half of the arbitrator’s fees is unenforceable under the FAA; since the purchasers cannot afford to pay such a fee the arbitration agreement does not provide an effective and accessible alternative forum.
-
Owensboro Health Facilities, L.P. v. Henderson, No. 4:16-CV-00002-JHM (W.D. Ky. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
Motion to compel arbitration and enjoin defendant granted in part. Court held that wrongful death beneficiaries are not bound by arbitration agreements to which they are not a party. Court further held that a requirement under Kentucky law that a power of attorney explicitly grants authority to sign arbitration agreements violates and is thus pre-empted by the FAA.
-
Newco Ltd. v. Government of Belize, No. 1:08-CV-02010 (D.C. Cir. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
District court judgment enforcing arbitral award affirmed. The Government of Belize failed to provide support for its assertion that the doctrine of international comity is a “rule of procedure” of the US, as provided for in the New York Convention. Further, the public policy interest in international comity does not present a clear-cut case under the New York Convention where enforcement would violate basic notions of morality and justice.
-
Minnesota Nurses Association v. North Memorial Health Care, No. 15-2211 (8th Cir. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
District court order granting in part union’s motion to vacate arbitration award affirmed. District court correctly concluded that the arbitrator exceeded the scope of his authority under the collective bargaining agreement by resolving a dispute not presented by the parties.
-
Goad v. St. David’s Healthcare Partnership, No. 1:16-CV-044-RP (W.D. Tex. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
Motion to dismiss and compel arbitration denied. Whether the employee received notice of the arbitration agreement presented a genuine issue of fact and under the FAA the parties have a right to a trial by jury on the issue.
-
Atwood v. Rent-A-Center East, Inc., No. 3:15-CV-1023-MJR-SCW (S.D. Ill. May 13, 2016)05/13/2016
Motion to compel arbitration under the FAA denied, but motion to compel arbitration under the Illinois Uniform Arbitration Act granted. Court held that the employee falls under the transportation-worker exemption to the FAA but that does not preclude arbitration under state law, if available.
-
Neurosigma, Inc. v. De Salles, No. 2:13-CV-07973-PJW (C.D. Cal. May 12, 2016)05/12/2016
Court granted defendant’s motion to approve the consent judgment arbitration award rendered by the AAA. Pursuant to FAA, court denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate or modify the award, finding the Stock Purchase Agreement was legal, the decision to issue an award of attorney’s fees based on bad faith was legal, and there was no arbitrator misconduct or bias.
-
Weirton Medical Center, Inc. v. QHR Intensive Resources, LLC, No. 5:15-CV-00131 (N.D. W. Va. May 12, 2016)05/12/2016
Motion to vacate arbitration award denied and motion to confirm granted. Court held that the arbitrator did not exceed his power, the award was not in manifest disregard of the law, and the award was not procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means.
-
Stover-Davis v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., No. 1:15-CV-01938-BAM (E.D. Cal. May 12, 2016)05/12/2016
Motion to compel arbitration granted. Court held that a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties and that such agreement is not illusory, unilateral, or unconscionable.