2016-2025 Arbitration Decisions

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.

• Rivera-Gómez v. Luxury Hotels International of Puerto Rico, Inc., No. 3:16-CV-03087-ADC (D.P.R. Mar. 13, 2018)

  03/13/2018

  Court granted motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that non-signatory defendant could invoke arbitration agreement signed by other entity in its corporate group.

• Nexteer Automotive Corporation v. Korea Delphi Automotive Systems Corporation, No. 2:13-CV-15189-GCS-LJM (E.D. Mich. Mar. 13, 2018)

  03/13/2018

  Court denied motion for attorney fees, finding that provision that attorney fees may be awarded in arbitration agreement did not cover fees and costs of enforcing arbitral award.

• Aetna Inc. v. The People’s Choice Hospital, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-04354-BMS (E.D. Pa. Mar. 13, 2018)

  03/13/2018

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that plaintiff had not established that non-signatory defendant was agent of signatory to arbitral agreement, and that arbitral agreement was not binding on defendant under an equitable estoppel theory since the claims in the litigation were “far afield” from the contractual obligations subject to arbitration.

• Welk Resort Sales v. Bryant, No. 6:17-CV-03197-SWH (W.D. Mo. Mar. 13, 2018)

  03/13/2018

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings, finding that movant had not established than an arbitration agreement was formed, and that trial should be set to determine outstanding factual issues as to contract formation.

• Smith v. Rooney, No. 2:17-CV-01730-JMV-JBC (D.N.J. Mar. 13, 2018)

  03/13/2018

  Court found that arbitrator’s decision was not entitled to preclusive effect under doctrine of collateral estoppel since the arbitrator’s decision did not concern the contractual provisions at issue.

• International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local Union No. 639 v. Airgas, Incorporated, No. 17-1349 (4th Cir. Mar. 13, 2018)

  03/13/2018

  Court of appeals dismissed appeal from preliminary injunction pending arbitration as moot, since award was issued in the interim.

• Hilton v. Fluent, LLC, No. 9:17-CV-81270-DMM (S.D. Fla. Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court deferred defendants’ motions to compel arbitration, finding that plaintiffs raised an issue of fact as to whether an arbitration agreement between the parties existed.  Court found that plaintiffs’ sworn denials that they visited the websites and completed the registration forms depicted in defendants’ screenshots placed at issue the existence of binding agreements, particularly considered in conjunction with the “curious circumstances” under which plaintiffs’ phone numbers came to be associated with other purportedly inaccurate personal data.

• Olivas v. The Hertz Corporation, No. 3:17-CV-01083-BAS-NLS (S.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that (i) car renter had accepted rental contract (with its arbitration clause) through the conduct of renting the car, and (ii) question of whether dispute falls within the scope of the arbitration clause was delegated to the arbitrator.

• Burke v. Borough of Red Bank, No. 3:17-CV-01800-BRM-LHG (D.N.J. Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court granted motion to dismiss, insofar as claims arose from Collective Bargaining Agreement subject to arbitration.

• International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-Transportation Division, ET v. CSX Transportation, Inc., No. 1:16-CV-02554-CAB (N.D. Ohio Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court granted motion for summary judgment upholding arbitration award of the National Railroad Adjustment Board, finding that the Board was interpreting the relevant agreements and therefore acting within its jurisdiction.

• Tennessee Tractor, LLC v. WH Administrators, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-02829-STA-EGB (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court granted in part and denied in part motion to compel arbitration, finding that plaintiff who had not signed arbitration agreement was not bound to arbitrate under it, since he was asserting ERISA claims and not claims under the agreement subject to arbitration.

• Egan v. Live Nation Worldwide, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-00445-MRH (W.D. Pa. Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court denied motion to compel arbitration for claim that failure to offer wheelchair-accessible seating during online ticket presales violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, finding that agreement to arbitrate the instant dispute was not formed by acceptance of terms of service in previous, unrelated online ticket purchase, or by logging into account to attempt to make online purchase at issue.

• Castellanos v. Raymours Furniture Company, Inc., No 2:17-CV-01923-JFB-ARL (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court stayed pending arbitration and rejected request to sever FLSA claims, finding that arbitration agreement’s statute of limitations provision shortening period in which FLSA claims may be brought was unenforceable.

• Transocean Offshore Gulf of Guinea VII Limited v. Erin Energy Corporation, No. 4:17-CV-02623 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 12, 2018)

  03/12/2018

  Court granted petition to enforce arbitral award, finding that consent awards are enforceable under the New York Convention.

• Teamsters Local Union No. 135 v. Sysco Indianapolis, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-00176-WTL-DLP (S.D. Ind. Mar. 9, 2018)

  03/09/2018

  Court granted summary judgment in award enforcement action, finding that award debtor could not raise defenses to the validity of the award after the period for challenging the award through a vacatur action had expired.

• Biggs.  v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-00340-JFB-ARL (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 9, 2018)

  03/09/2018

  Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration on an individual basis pursuant to the FAA. Court followed Supreme Court precedent to find that the class action waiver in the agreement was enforceable.

• Finastra USA Corporation v. Zepecki, No. 3:18-CV-00725-WHO (N.D. Cal. Mar. 9, 2018)

  03/09/2018

  Court granted temporary restraining order enjoining former employee from participating in state employment agency hearing, finding that employer’s motion to compel arbitration was likely to succeed and that proceeding with state agency hearings would cause irreparable harm.  Court found unpersuasive employee’s argument that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable and that employer had waived its right to arbitrate by refusing mediation.

• Henderson v. A&D Interests, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-00096 (S.D. Tex. Mar. 9, 2018)

  03/09/2018

  Court granted motion to dismiss in favor of arbitration, rejecting challenges that the arbitration agreement was illusory and unconscionable, and finding that the agreement had a valid delegation clause.

• Harris v. Fujitsu America International, No. 2:17-CV-02563-SHM-CGC (W.D. Tenn. Mar. 9, 2018)

  03/09/2018

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that arbitration agreement could be considered in deciding a motion to dismiss notwithstanding that it was not attached to the complaint, and that plaintiff’s claims fell within the scope of the arbitration.

• Binienda v. Atwells Realty Corp., No. 1:15-CV-00253-WES-PAS (D.R.I. Mar. 9, 2018)

  03/09/2018

  Court denied motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that question whether defendant waived its right to compel arbitration due to its litigation conduct was presumptively for court to decide, and that defendant had waived its right to compel arbitration by litigating for two years before asserting it.

• Rideout v. CashCall, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-02817-RFB-VCF (D. Nev. Mar. 8, 2018)

  03/08/2018

  Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss and to compel arbitration. Court found the agreement was procedurally and substantively unconscionable and therefore no valid agreement to arbitrate existed. Court further held that the arbitration agreement was invalid because it required exclusive application of Cheyenne River Sioux law, which would cause plaintiff to waive federal statutory rights.

• Price  v. UBS Financial Services, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-01882-WJM-MF (D.N.J. Mar. 8, 2018)

  03/08/2018

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding under third circuit precedent the defendant had waived its right to seek arbitration because the initial motion to dismiss did not include an arbitration claim and defendant waited over eight months to file this motion to compel.

• Union de Tronquistas de Puerto Rico, Local 901, No. 3:17-CV-01288-SEC (D.P.R. Mar. 8, 2018)

  03/08/2018

  Court granted summary judgment against claim to vacate arbitral award, finding that the award was not unfounded in reason or fact.

• Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters v. Upright Shoring & Scaffold, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-01509-WQH-NLS (S.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2018)

  03/08/2018

  Court granted motion to confirm arbitration award as to the respondent that was a party to the arbitration proceedings and denying it as to other respondents, finding that respondents who were not party to the arbitration proceedings were not bound by the arbitrator’s determination that they were alter egos of the award debtor.

• Williams-Jackson v. Innovative Senior Care Home Health of Edmond, LLC, No. 17-6168 (10th Cir. Mar. 8, 2018)

  03/08/2018

  Circuit court vacated district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration. Court found that the mutual promise to arbitrate was not illusory or unsupported by adequate consideration because terms of the agreement were equally binding on both parties, and defendant could not modify the terms unilaterally without giving notice.

• Money Concepts Capital Corp v. Schryer, No. 9:17-CV-80922-DMM (S.D. Fla. March 7, 2018)

  03/07/2018

  Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment.  Plaintiff securities broker-dealer sought reimbursement from defendant prior employee for settlements with customers whose accounts were handled by defendant.  Defendant refused and brought arbitration proceedings before FINRA in Los Angeles.  The FINRA arbitration panel heard plaintiff’s motion to transfer the Los Angeles arbitration to Palm Beach County, Florida pursuant to the venue-selection clause in the parties’ agreement and ordered the arbitration to remain in Los Angeles.  Plaintiff then initiated the action to compel arbitration in Palm Beach County, Florida and to stay arbitration proceedings in Los Angeles, California.  Court accepted defendants’ argument that arbitration proceedings must proceed in Los Angeles based on the arbitration panel’s order, despite the order being inconsistent with the parties’ venue-selection provision.

• Perei v. Arrigo DCJ Sawgrass, Inc., No. 0:18-CV-60091-BB (S.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 2018)

  03/07/2018

  Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration. Plaintiff argued that the dispute fell outside the scope of the arbitration agreement but court found that the agreement delegated the interpretation of the scope of the agreement to the arbitrators and court was required to enforce the agreement under the FAA.

• Pattison v. Great-West Financial Retirement Plan Services, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-02136-GEB (D. Kan. Mar. 7, 2018)

  03/07/2018

  Court denied third-party defendant’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration. Court found the operative arbitration agreement in this dispute had an exception for certain causes of action including the one presently before the court.

• Hall v. CVS Health Corporation, No. 2:17-CV-00289-JOB (N.D. Ala. Mar. 07, 2018)

  03/07/2018

  Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, holding that there was a genuine dispute of material facts over whether a valid arbitration agreement was formed that required a trial.

• Mohammed v. Uber Technologies Inc., No. 1:16-CV-02537 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 7, 2018)

  03/07/2018

  Court had previously denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and held trial on question of whether valid arbitration agreement existed. Finding that a valid agreement did exist, court compelled arbitration pursuant to the FAA.

• Cavlovic v. J.C. Penney Corporation, No. 17-3174 (10th Cir. Mar. 7, 2018)

  03/07/2018

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the plaintiff’s allegations were outside the scope of the agreement at issue.

• Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC v. Calvin, No. 16-3833-CV (2d Cir. Mar. 7, 2018)

  03/07/2018

  Court of appeals affirmed district court’s denial of defendant’s petition seeking to compel bilateral rather than class arbitration. Court determined the question of whether contract permitted class arbitration should be determined by the arbitrator and not the court.

• Capitol City Amusements, Inc. v. Zamperla, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-01567-KJM-KJN (E.D. Cal. Mar. 6, 2018)

  03/06/2018

  Court denied without prejudice defendant’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration. Court found that there was a genuine issue of fact as to whether plaintiff had signed a version of the contract that contained the arbitration clause, and thus defendant had not met its burden of establishing the existence of a valid arbitration agreement.

• Doyle v. AD Astra Recovery Services, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-05233-NLH-AMD (D.N.J. Mar. 6, 2018)

  03/06/2018

  Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss and to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA. Court held that while defendant was not party to the arbitration agreement, defendant was a “related party” as contemplated in the agreement.

• Gergeni.  v. The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society, No. 5:17-CV-04037-LRR (N.D. Iowa. Mar. 6, 2018)

  03/06/2018

  Court granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA. Court found that questions of arbitrability had been delegated to arbitrators by incorporation of the AAA arbitration rules, thus the issue of whether the arbitration agreement was procedurally or substantively unconscionable should be decided by arbitrators.

• Emericare, Inc.  v. Calvin, No. 1:16-CV-00446-RM-KMT (D. Colo. Mar. 6, 2018)

  03/06/2018

  Magistrate Judge recommended court find in favor of plaintiff’s by compelling arbitration pursuant to the FAA and reject defendant’s request to allow state courts to decide arbitrability.

• Nelson v. Klaas No. 1:16-CV-00042-DLH-CSM (D.N.D. Mar. 5, 2018)

  03/05/2018

  Court denied defendants’ motion to join additional counter-defendant in connection with confirmation proceedings of an arbitral award, finding the inclusion of the additional defendant would destroy diversity. 

• Plummer v. Nicor Energy Services Company, No. 1:17-CV-02177-WTL-MPB (S.D. Ind. Mar. 5, 2018)

  03/05/2018

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the mailing of terms and conditions containing an arbitration clause to plaintiff several days after plaintiff had agreed to a price over telephone was insufficient to establish an agreement to arbitrate disputes under Indiana law.

• Rancher v. Brookdale Senior Living Communities, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-00941-LSC (N.D. Ala. Mar. 5, 2018)

  03/05/2018

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that arbitration would limit her statutory rights by potentially requiring her to pay fees in excess of the court filing fee.

• Meyer v. Kalanick, No. 1:15-CV-09796-JSR (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2018)

  03/05/2018

  Court, on remand from the second circuit, granted motion to compel arbitration as to one defendant and motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the other. Plaintiff argued that the right to arbitration had been waived, but court found that a defendant who had been added as a necessary party had not waived its right to arbitration, and the claims could not continue in that party’s absence.

• Abdullayeva v. Attending Homecare Services, LLC., No. 1:17-CV-05951-JBW-SJB (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 5, 2018)

  03/05/2018

  Court denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration finding that the language of the arbitration clause governing this dispute was permissive not mandatory, therefore the plaintiff may choose whether to arbitrate.

• Petersen-Dean, Inc. v. Solarworld Americas, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-07326-WHO (N.D. Cal. Mar. 5, 2018)

  03/05/2018

  Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA, finding the dispute subject to valid agreement to arbitrate.

• Morton v. Darden Restaurants, Inc., No. 8:17-CV-01865-HMH-KFM (D.S.C. Mar. 2, 2018)

  03/02/2018

  Magistrate judge recommended granting motion to compel arbitration and dismiss proceedings.  Judge reasoned that even in the absence of a signed arbitration agreement, defendant had demonstrated plaintiff’s agreement to arbitrate.  On March 28, the district court, finding that no objection had been filed to the magistrate’s findings and that there was no clear error on the face of the recommendation, compelled arbitration and dismissed proceedings.

• BSH Hausgerate GMBH v. Kamhi, No. 1:17-CV-05776-RWS (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2018)

  03/02/2018

  Court granted petition to confirm award pursuant to the New York Convention, rejecting respondent’s arguments that the award was ambiguous or contrary to the laws governing the arbitration. 

• Rusoro Mining Limited v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, No. 1:16-CV-02020-RJL (D.D.C. Mar. 2, 2018)

  03/02/2018

  Court granted petition to confirm an ICSID Additional Facility arbitration award.  In rejecting the respondent’s argument that under Art. V(1)(c) of the New York Convention the award should not be confirmed because the tribunal exceeded its scope of its consent to arbitrate, the court held that the issue of arbitrability was assigned to the tribunal and the court must give substantial deference to that decision and not second-guess the tribunal’s construction of the Canada-Venezuela BIT.  Further, the arbitral tribunal did not exceed its authority in its damages calculation and reached a reasonable quantum of damages.  Finally, the court held that applying the Europcar factors supported an immediate confirmation.

• Smith v. Altisource Solutions, No. 17-1501 (6th Cir. Mar. 2, 2018)

  03/02/2018

  Court of appeals affirmed the district court’s order denying in part the motion to compel arbitration because several of the claims did not fall within the scope of the arbitral agreement.

• Agviq, LLC v. Right Way Environmental Contractors, No. 3:17-CV-02034-WGY (D.P.R. Mar. 1, 2018)

  03/01/2018

  Plaintiff sought preliminary injunction to enjoin arbitration proceedings, arguing that the dispute fell within an exception to the arbitration provision. The agreement delegated the question of arbitrability to the court, and Court held the dispute was arbitrable under the agreement granting summary judgment for defendant.

• Chambers v. Hampden Coal, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-02744 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 1, 2018)

  03/01/2018

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA.  Court found there was an enforceable arbitration agreement between the parties even though the agreement mistakenly referred to a different employee and the agreement explicitly stated it was not a contract.  Court concluded that the claim on improper termination based on age could be referred to arbitration.

• Shaw v. ROI Land Investments Ltd., No. 2:17-CV-01165 (D. Nev. Mar. 1, 2018)

  03/01/2018

  Court granted motion to confirm arbitration award pursuant to the FAA, finding that arbitrator’s decision did not show a manifest disregard for the law and that the arbitrator did not engage in misconduct.

• Doctor’s Associates, Inc. v. El Turk, No. 3:17-CV-02019-JCH (D. Conn. Feb. 28, 2018)

  02/28/2018

  Court granted motion to compel arbitration, holding that a party may be “aggrieved” for the purposes of the FAA and federal standing even if it is not party to an underlying litigation. Court also held that it had jurisdiction to compel arbitration even though underlying litigation was in Ohio, because the FAA allows petitions to compel arbitration to be filed in any district court with subject matter jurisdiction. Based on the language of the agreement, court held that the plaintiff could bring any claims arising out of the agreement it wished to arbitrate, and that further decisions about arbitrability of claims should be decided by the arbitrator.