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.
-
Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. M.C.F. Associates, No. 1:19-cv-07783-JGK (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 6, 2020)01/06/2020
Court granted motion to confirm arbitration award where defendant failed repeatedly to respond to plaintiff’s petition. Court also awarded costs and fees to plaintiff.
-
Nichols v. US Bank, National Association, No. 2:19-MC-00162-KS-MTP (S.D. Miss. Jan. 6, 2020)01/06/2020
Court denied plaintiff’s motion to confirm arbitration award where plaintiff failed to provide any evidence that there was an arbitration agreement between the parties.
-
Law Offices of Joseph L. Manson III v. Aoki., No. 1:19-CV-04392-LTS-GWG (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2020)01/03/2020
Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings pending outcome of arbitration, but denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration where seat of arbitration mandated by arbitration agreement was Washington, D.C. Court found that a valid agreement to arbitrate did exist, but that it did not have power under the FAA § 4 to compel arbitration proceedings which occur outside of the Southern District of New York.
-
National Motors, Inc. v. Universal Warranty Corporation, No. 1:19-CV-00052-ELH (D. Md. Jan. 3, 2020)01/03/2020
Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration. Court found that arbitration clause was not unconscionable and that because it was susceptible of an interpretation that covered the asserted dispute, it also was not impermissibly vague.
-
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC v. Carlson, No. 4:19-CV-01470 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 2, 2020)01/02/2020
Court granted motion to confirm arbitral award, finding respondent had failed to establish evident partiality. Specifically, presiding arbitrator did not disclose to parties that he had been retained as counsel in unrelated proceedings in which the adverse party was represented by the same firm as the respondent’s counsel in the arbitration. Court found that while a reasonable person could conclude that the presiding arbitrator was partial, that was insufficient to meet the stringent burden required to overturn an arbitration award based on evident partiality. Court also found that the arbitral tribunal’s decisions in relation to evidentiary matters did not deprive respondent of a fair hearing.
-
Ostrolenk Faber LLP v. Lagassey, No. 1:18-CV-01533-RA (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 2, 2020)01/02/2020
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that there was a valid obligation to arbitrate, and that the pro se defendant did not, by his delay, waive his right to compel arbitration.
-
Wayland Kathan v. Autovest, LLC, No. 2:19-CV-00486-TC-CMR (D. Utah Dec. 30, 2019)12/30/2019
Court denied plaintiff’s motion to lift stay of court action pending arbitration. Court found that AAA’s initial (erroneous) refusal to administer the arbitration was not a proper reason to lift the stay, since AAA eventually agreed to administer the arbitration. Court also found that defendant had made clear throughout the process that it was willing and able to resolve any issues identified by AAA and to arbitrate the case.
-
Meekins v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 3:19-CV-501-DJN (E.D. Va. Dec. 30, 2019)12/30/2019
Court denied motion to confirm arbitral award, finding petitioner had failed to provide any evidence that respondents entered into a binding arbitration agreement or assented to arbitration of disputes arising under a mortgage facility.
-
Doctor’s Associates, LLC v. Tripathi, No. 16-4329-CV (2d Cir. Dec. 23, 2019)12/23/2019
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s decision granting injunction to enjoin California state-court action commenced by defendants in breach of arbitration clause, finding that arbitration clause had clearly delegated gateway issues for the arbitrator’s determination in the first instance.
-
National Union Fire Insurance v. BMC Stock Holdings, Inc., No. 18-3851-CV (2d Cir. Dec. 20, 2019)12/20/2019
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s decision granting motion to compel arbitration, finding that agreement between parties had incorporated by reference arbitration clause in respondent’s general liability insurance policies
-
Jamieson v. Securities America, Inc., No. 7:19-CV-01817-VB (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2019)12/20/2019
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA, finding the plaintiffs’ agreed to arbitrate and the arbitral agreements applied to the new accounts at issue by incorporation. Court determined that all plaintiffs did not have to agree to the same terms of arbitration for all of their accounts and that the plaintiffs’ claims fell within the scope of the arbitral agreements. Court stayed proceedings pending arbitration.
-
Wilson v. Huuuge, Inc., No. 18-36017 (9th Cir. Dec. 20, 2019)12/20/2019
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of motion to compel arbitration against a smartphone app user, finding that defendant did not provide reasonable notice of the arbitration agreement. Since plaintiff had neither actual nor constructive notice of the agreement he was not bound by the arbitration clause.
-
JR. Food Stores, Inc. v. Hartland Construction Group, LLC and Peoples Bank, No. 1:19-CV-00076-GNS-RSE (W.D. Ky. Dec. 19, 2019)12/19/2019
Court granted motion to compel mediation and arbitration and to stay proceedings pursuant to the FAA. Court found it was undisputed that the plaintiff and one of the defendants entered into a valid agreement to arbitrate. Court concluded that the other defendant, a non-signatory issuer of a performance bond for a construction contract, was compelled to arbitrate, where the performance bond made reference to the contract and the disputes between the parties were intertwined with the underlying contract.
-
UBS Financial Services, Inc. v. Asociación de Empleados del Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico, No. 3:16-CV-02237-WGY (D. Mass. Dec. 19, 2019)12/19/2019
Court denied motion to vacate the arbitration award, finding pursuant to the FAA that defendants failed to meet their burden of establishing evident partiality or misbehavior of the arbitrators.
-
Zean v. Comcast Broadband Security, LLC and Southwest Credit Systems, L.P., No. 0:17-CV-05117-WMW-KMM (D. Minn. Dec. 17, 2019)12/19/2019
Court adopted magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny the motion to vacate the award but rejected the recommendation to confirm the award, because no party had moved the court for such relief.
-
Citadel Servicing Corporation v. Castle Placement, LLC, No. 1:19-CV-03212-KPF (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 19, 2019)12/19/2019
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA and denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin defendants from enforcing the arbitration clause. Court found that it was for the arbitrator to determine whether non-signatory defendants were agents of the signatory and therefore, could enforce the arbitral agreement. Court considered that the incorporation of the FINRA Rules, which empower the arbitrator to decide issues of arbitrability, provided further support for the parties’ intent to delegate issues of arbitrability to the arbitrator.
-
Bestway (USA), Inc., v. Scott, No. 18-16228 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2019)12/18/2019
Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that he had waived his right to arbitrate.
-
Hobbs v. Apollo Interactive, Inc., No. 4:19-CV-00057-CDL (M.D. Ga. Dec. 17, 2019)12/17/2019
Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the action in favor of arbitration. Court found that there was a genuine issue of fact as to whether the parties had entered into an agreement to arbitrate and at the early stage in the proceedings, the court could not conclude as a matter of law that the parties had a valid agreement to arbitrate.
-
Flores v. Adir International, LLC, No. 18-55959 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2019)12/17/2019
Court affirmed district court’s denial of motion to compel arbitration, finding plaintiff had waived the right to arbitrate.
-
Banks v. Waitr Holdings, Inc., No. 2:19-CV-00898-TAD-KK (W.D. La. Dec. 17, 2019)12/17/2019
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding there was a valid agreement to arbitrate and that the statutory claims fell within the scope of the agreement. Court denied motion to dismiss the claims with prejudice and instead, administratively closed the case.
-
Henry v. Educational Financial Service, No. 18-20809 (5th. Cir. Dec. 16, 2019)12/16/2019
Court of appeals affirmed bankruptcy court’s decision denying motion to compel arbitration, finding that bankruptcy courts have discretion to refuse to compel arbitration in proceedings seeking enforcement of a discharge injunction between debtor and creditor.
-
Orman v. Central Loan Administration & Reporting, No. 2:19-CV-04756-DWL (D. Ariz. Dec. 16, 2019)
12/16/2019Court denied motion to confirm an arbitration award under the FAA, finding that there was no agreement to arbitrate between the parties. Court granted respondents’ motion to vacate concluding that the arbitrators exceeded their powers by premising the award on a non-existent contract. Court imposed sanctions on petitioner’s counsel and on petitioner.
-
Galilea, LLC and Kittler v. AGCS Marine Insurance Company, No. 1:19-CV-05768-VEC (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 16, 2019)12/16/2019
Court denied motion to vacate the arbitration award and granted petition to confirm the award under the FAA. Court found the tribunal did not exceed its authority, concluding New York was the appropriate forum for the arbitration and the ICDR was the proper governing body pursuant to the forum selection clause and determining that the arbitration agreement covered all claims decided by the tribunal. Court held the tribunal did not exhibit a manifest disregard for the law in admitting the insurance application and found that the arbitrators were not biased.
-
Republic of Kazakhstan v. Lawler, No. 2:19-MC-00035-DWL (D. Ariz. Dec. 16, 2019)12/16/2019
Court granted petitioner’s motion to seal its response to respondent’s motion to quash a subpoena to compel testimony and production of evidence in a pending investor-state arbitration pursuant to 28 USC § 1782.
-
Brown v. Sperber-Porter, No. 2:16-CV-02801-SRB (D. Ariz. Dec. 14, 2016)12/14/2019
Court granted motion to confirm arbitral award, dismissing respondents’ complaints about the arbitral tribunal’s conduct of the arbitration and its substantive decision.
-
Raeis Constructors, LLC v. Circle K Stores, Inc., No. 5:18-CV-240-FL (E.D. N.C. Dec. 13, 2019)12/13/2019
Court granted motion to compel arbitration between defendant and third-party defendant, and denied plaintiff’s motion to compel arbitration with third-party defendant finding that plaintiff had waived its right to arbitrate by substantially utilizing the litigation process.
-
Prime Pork, LLC v. NBO3 Technologies, LLC, No. 0:19-CV-01074-WMW-KMM (D. Minn. Dec. 13, 2019)12/13/2019
Court granted petition to confirm arbitration award, finding that the award was sufficiently reasoned to merit confirmation. Court denied petitioners request to enforce the award jointly and severally with respect to third-party defendant where arbitrator had not addressed the liability of this party in his award. Court found that this request would amount to a modification of the award, which it was without legal authority to grant.
-
Reynolds & Reynolds Company, Inc. v. Alan Vines Automotive of Jackson, LLC, No. 3:19-CV-00276-TMR (S.D. Ohio Dec. 13, 2019)12/13/2019
Court granted petition to confirm arbitral award, finding that it had subject matter and personal jurisdiction, and that the award had not been vacated, modified, or corrected, nor had a motion been filed seeking such relief.
-
Bowman v. Phoenix Trinity Manufacturing, Inc., No. 3:18-CV-00332-TMR-MJN (S.D. Ohio Dec. 13, 2019)12/13/2019
Magistrate judge recommended that court grant motion to compel arbitration where plaintiffs asserted that defendant had waived right to arbitrate by filing an answer to plaintiffs’ complaint with no mention of an arbitration agreement, and by further engaging in litigation for over one year. Court found that plaintiff had failed to cite to precedent or to demonstrate that it was prejudiced by defendant’s delay in filing motion to compel arbitration.
-
Story v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated and Bank of America Corporation, No. 2:19-CV-02301-SSV-JVM (E.D. La. Dec. 13, 2019)12/13/2019
Court granted motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA. Court found the arbitral agreement was valid with regard to a non-signatory parent company where its subsidiary was a signatory to the arbitral agreement. Court also found the dispute fell within the scope of the agreement and concluded that the question of whether a settlement in a related suit mooted the present dispute was an issue for the arbitrator.
-
Tower Loan of Mississippi, LLC v. Willis, No. 18-60344 (5th. Cir. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court of appeals reversed district court’s decision denying motion to compel arbitration, finding that, notwithstanding conflicting procedural details in the applicable arbitration clauses of two related contracts, the parties had reached a valid agreement to arbitrate all disputes and had delegated threshold arbitrability issues to the arbitrator.
-
Mchaney v. Bank of America, N.A., No. 1:19-MC-00027-RB (D. Minn. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court denied motion to confirm arbitration award where plaintiff did not file a copy of the arbitration agreement between the parties with the court. Court held that plaintiff had thus failed to show that the court had jurisdiction over the matter of confirmation pursuant to the FAA.
-
Crystallex International Corp. v. PDV Holding, Inc., No. 15-CV-1082-LPS (D. Del. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court issued stay of proceedings to collect on debts owed by the Republic of Venezuela on all arbitration related matters before it, pending the conclusion of proceedings in the Supreme Court on the matter. The Third Circuit had affirmed the district court’s initial writ of attachment and denied requests by Venezuela for rehearing, leading to the expiration of their stay on the matters. Further, the Supreme Court had yet to issue a writ of certiorari nor had the parties yet requested one. However, the court found that public interest, including “the interest of furthering the expressed foreign policy of the United States, as determined by the Executive Branch”, strongly supported the issuance of a stay.
-
Chuck Willis v. Tower Loan of Mississippi, L.L.C., No. 18-60344 (5th Cir. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court of appeals reversed decision of district court and bankruptcy court to deny a motion to compel arbitration and remanded the case with instructions to refer it to arbitration. Court held that the parties had reached a valid agreement to arbitrate and had delegated threshold arbitrability issues to the arbitrator. In particular, where the lower courts had determined that procedural differences in two separate arbitration agreements between the parties rendered the agreement to arbitrate insufficiently definite, the court held that the agreements did in fact evidence an “unmistakable” intention to submit disputes to arbitration and that the arbitrator should decide on the procedural issues.
-
Trustees for the Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund v. Bonanza., No. 1:19-CV-02158 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court granted petition to confirm arbitral award where defendant failed to make an appearance in the arbitration and before the court.
-
Galloway v. Priority Imports Richmond, LLC., No. 3:19-CV-00209-JAG (E.D. Va. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, concluding that the parties entered into a valid agreement to arbitrate and that a prohibition against the award of punitive damages in the agreement did not violate public policy.
-
Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, No. 1:19-CV-00735-WMS (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court granted petitioner’s motion to stay judgment pending appeal, as petitioner proffered a securities account that exceeded the amount of the arbitral award. Court found the account adequately secured the judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(b).
-
Golomb Mercantile Company LLC v. Marks Paneth LLP, No. 1:18-CV-03845-JFK-SLC (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration between non-signatory defendant and signatory plaintiff under principle of estoppel.
-
Damian Dalla-Longa v. Magnetar Capital LLC, No. 1:19-CV-11246-LGS (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2019)12/12/2019
Court denied motion to seal petition to vacate arbitral award where the parties’ arbitration agreement contained a confidentiality provision. Court found that petitions to vacate are judicial documents to which the presumption of public access attaches. Court held that it had discretion to grant specific redactions, but refused to seal the entire action.
-
Dish Network, LLC v. Albertis, Inc.., No. 1:19-CV-02179-DDD-NRN (D. Colo. Dec. 11, 2019)12/11/2019
Court granted motion for default judgement to confirm arbitration award where defendant was in default in the action to confirm the award. Court found subject matter jurisdiction, venue, and personal jurisdiction were proper where, inter alia, the underlying arbitration had been conducted in the forum state encompassed by the district court and the contract was governed by the law of the forum state.
-
Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. v. Silverman, No. 1:19-CV-07812-NRB (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 11, 2019)12/11/2019
Court granted motion to confirm arbitral award and held that attorneys’ fees granted under the award did not contradict an express and unambiguous term of the contract between the parties. Court thus held that there was no manifest disregard of law, which could defeat confirmation.
-
Graphic Communications Conference v. McDonald & Eudy Printers, Inc., No. 8:18-CV-03830-PWG (D. Md. Dec. 10, 2019)12/10/2019
Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss based on procedural untimeliness where defendant argued plaintiff had allowed a five-day window in which to commence arbitration to lapse. Court held that this was not a question of arbitrability for the court, but a threshold procedural issue for the arbitrator.
-
Moore v. Performance of Brentwood., No. 3:19-CV-00606 –WLC (M.D. Tenn. Dec. 10, 201912/10/2019
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that a modification provision in the arbitration agreement allowing defendant to unilaterally make “changes that promote the agreement’s purpose” did not render defendant’s promise to arbitrate illusory.
-
Brown v. Ally Financial., No. 18-CV-00070-KS-MTP (S.D. Miss. Dec. 10, 2019)12/10/2019
Court denied plaintiff’s motion to confirm arbitration award and granted defendant’s motion to vacate award where it found plaintiff failed to support her motion with proper evidence that defendant ever received notice of the arbitration and where plaintiff failed to comply with the procedures mandated in the arbitration agreement for procuring said award. Court further ordered plaintiff to show cause why she should not be sanctioned for presenting her motion to the court in such manner.
-
The Republic of Kazakhstan v. Lawler., No. 2:19-MC-00035-DWL (D. Ariz. Dec. 10, 2019)12/10/2019
Court granted defendant’s motion to seal with regard to particular exhibits it was required to provide in assistance of an investor-state arbitration pursuant to a §1782 motion that had been won by plaintiff. Court found that, upon review, the redactions dealing with the procedure and findings of the arbitral tribunal were appropriate. Court further held that the interest in maintaining confidentiality for the requisite parties in light of a confidentiality order issued by the tribunal outweighed public policy favoring disclosure.
-
W&W-AFCO Steel, LLC v. SME Steel Contractors., No. 4:19-CV-03042-SBA (W.D. Okla. Dec. 10, 2019)12/10/2019
Court granted motion to stay proceedings pending arbitration where District Court in Utah had just granted motion to compel arbitration between the same parties, and defendant had requested a stay of the proceedings pending the outcome of both that decision and an on-going AAA arbitration.
-
Local 1982, Int. Longshoremen’s Association v. Midwest Terminals of Toledo, Int. Inc., No. 19-3319 (6th Cir. Dec. 10, 2019)12/10/2019
Court of appeals affirmed district court order compelling parties to proceed with grievance and arbitration procedures set forth in collective bargaining agreement, in order to give effect to an award which had previously been confirmed by the court, but for which the parties sought further clarification from the initial arbitral tribunal. Defendant argued that the award was unenforceable because it could not be clarified by the initial tribunal where both parties allowed the time for appeal of the award to lapse. Court rejected this argument, finding that to allow such lapse to defeat the possibility of clarification would be improper where: defendant refused to participate in the initial arbitration, plaintiff had no reason to appeal a favorable award rendered in said arbitration, and the lower courts had already affirmed the legitimacy of the proceeding.
-
Franklin v. Community Regional Medical Center., No. 4:19-CV-03042-SBA (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2019)12/09/2019
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding non-signatory defendant was entitled to rely on the arbitration agreement between plaintiff and third-party under the doctrine of equitable estoppel.
-
Oliveira v. New Prime, Inc., No. 1:15-CV-10603-PBS (D. Mass. Dec. 9, 2019)
12/09/2019Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, holding that defendant had waived its right to arbitrate under the state arbitration law of Missouri. Court found defendant had “substantially invoked the litigation machinery” by litigating for four years their assertion that the FAA applied to the controversy, rather than attempting to compel arbitration under the requisite state arbitration law at the beginning of their suit.
-
North Phoenix Road, LLC v. IMortgage.com, Inc., No. 1:19-CV-00676-MC (D. Or. Dec. 9, 2019)12/09/2019
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in commercial office lease dispute, where there was no dispute that the lease contained a valid arbitration agreement. Court found defendant had not waived their right to arbitrate because their conduct was consistent with the right to compel arbitration and plaintiff failed to meet its burden to show prejudice arising from said conduct.