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.
-
Walkwell International, Inc. v. DJO Global, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-00270-EJL-REB (D. Idaho Nov. 15, 2017)
11/15/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that party had failed to establish that arbitration would be cost prohibitive and that arbitration clause was “broad and far reaching” and therefore covered all related claims arising out of the dispute.
-
KDDI Global LLC v. Fisk Telecom LLC, No. 3:17-CV-05445-BRM-DEA (D.N.J. Nov. 15, 2017)
11/15/2017Court granted motion to dismiss in favor of arbitration, finding that agreement to arbitrate in accordance with the AAA’s Commercial Arbitration Rules, which grant the arbitrator “the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction”, constitutes an agreement to arbitrate arbitrability.
-
Myers v. TRG Customer Solutions, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-00052 (N.D. Tenn. Nov. 15, 2017)
11/15/2017Court granted motion to compel individual arbitration, finding that a collective action asserting claims under the Fair Labor Standard Act does not qualify as concerted activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act, but refused to dismiss the action, since there was an open question whether other opt-in plaintiffs had signed valid and enforceable arbitration agreements.
-
Luster-Malone v. Cook County, No. 1:16-CV-02903 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court granted motion to dismiss action to vacate arbitral award, finding that plaintiff had not established gross error in the arbitrator’s findings that there were non-political grounds for plaintiff’s termination and that the plaintiff’s complaints were untimely.
-
SCL Basilisk AG v. Agribusiness United Savannah Logistics LLC, No. 16-15535 (11th Cir. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court of appeal affirmed district court’s denial of petition for security in aid of pending arbitration, finding that (i) such relief is not authorized by Rule B of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions where not used to secure jurisdiction; (ii) applicable Georgia law did not permit a court to create new substantive remedies in favor of arbitration; and (iii) court’s inherent admiralty powers did not support exercise of power or attachment where not used to secure jurisdiction.
-
TMCO Ltd. v. Green Light Energy Solutions R&D Corp., No. 4:17-CV-00997-KAW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court granted petition to confirm arbitration award and enter judgment, finding that questions regarding the feasibility of specific performance were premature at the confirmation stage, and that potential impossibility of counter-performance did not fall within the public policy exception.
-
Green Tree Servicing, L.L.C. v. Ducksworth, No. 17-60109 (5th Cir. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Circuit court dismissed appeal, finding that a district court’s order compelling arbitration and dismissing the case with prejudice was not a final appealable order since a case involving the same parties and essentially the same dispute was stayed in the district court pending arbitration.
-
Green Tree Servicing, L.L.C. v. Dove, No. 17-60116 (5th Cir. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Circuit court dismissed appeal, finding that a district court’s order compelling arbitration and dismissing the case with prejudice was not a final appealable order since a case involving the same parties and essentially the same dispute was stayed in the district court pending arbitration.
-
Shore Point Distributing Company v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 701, No. 3:17-CV-01950-PGS-DEA (D.N.J. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court denied motion to vacate arbitration award without prejudice and remanded proceedings to arbitrator to finalize the remedy, finding that it was premature to determine whether arbitral award should be vacated since arbitrator had retained jurisdiction over the application of the remedial formula set forth in the award.
-
Bowers v. Northern Two Cayes Company Limited, No. 1:15-CV-00029-MR-DLH (W.D.N.C. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court granted unopposed motion to enter judgment on arbitral award but denied motion to certify the award under the New York Convention, finding that New York Convention applied only to foreign arbitral awards, and that the court judgment itself could be domesticated abroad.
-
Nano Gas Technologies, Inc. v. Roe, No. 1:17-CV-01738 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court denied petition to vacate arbitral award, finding that (i) the arbitrator did not exceed his authority by ruling on a matter that were not addressed in the counterclaim; (ii) the award was final and definite notwithstanding its failure to provide a specific factual description; (iii) the award was not internally inconsistent; (iv) the award was not in manifest disregard of the law, since it did not direct any party to violate the law; and (v) the award was not against public policy.
-
Abel v. All Green Building Services of New York LLC, No. 1:16-CV-08522-JPO (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed case, finding that arbitration provision of collective bargaining agreement was applicable to employee’s religious discrimination claims.
-
Parish v. Macy’s Retail Holdings, Inc., No. 4:17-CV-00120-A (N.D. Tex. Nov. 14, 2017)
11/14/2017Court denied motion to stay and compel arbitration, finding that plaintiff had waived her right to invoke arbitration by prosecuting her claim in court
-
S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. v. Ghersy Group Integrated Communications, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-22380-KMW (S.D. Fla. Nov. 13, 2017)11/13/2017
Court granted motion to confirm arbitration award, as defendant filed no response in opposition to the motion.
-
Rohde v. Family Dollar Stores of Indiana, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-00225-TLS-SLC (N.D. Ind. Nov. 13, 2017)
11/13/2017Court granted motion to dismiss action to vacate arbitral award, finding that plaintiff had not established gross error in the arbitrator’s findings that there were non-political grounds for plaintiff’s termination and that the plaintiff’s complaints were untimely.
-
Ralph v. Haj, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-01332- JM-JMA (S.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2017)
11/13/2017Court provisionally granted in part and denied in part motion to compel arbitration and stayed entire action, finding that, although a ninth circuit decision in Morris v. Ernst & Young found that collective action waivers were impermissible for claims under the Fair Labor Standard Act, the Supreme Court had granted certiorari to review that decision. It was therefore appropriate to stay the entire action pending the Supreme Court’s decision to prevent a situation where some claims were heard in arbitration and others before the court.
-
Sharp Corporation v. Hisense USA Corporation, No. 1:17-CV-01648-JEB (D.D.C. Nov. 13, 2017)
11/13/2017Court granted motion to dismiss action seeking a preliminary injunction against enforcement in the United States of an interim arbitral award enjoining a party from making disruptive or disparaging statements against about the other party or the dispute pending the outcome of the arbitration. Court found that, although there was subject matter jurisdiction to grant such a declaratory judgment, there was no personal jurisdiction over the foreign defendant, although the latter question was a “close call” in light of the connection between the court action and speech in the jurisdiction. On the merits, the court determined that free speech concerns would not prevent enforcement of the interim award (and thus did not merit a preliminary injunction against enforcement), since court enforcement of private agreements does not fulfill the state action requirement under the First Amendment or its underlying public policy. In any event, the court would exercise its discretion not to award the declaratory judgment, since the interim award was subject to a pending motion to vacate at the seat of the arbitration.
-
James Shackelford Heating and Cooling, LC v. AT&T Corporation, No. 4:17-CV-00663-ODS (W.D. Mo. Nov. 11, 2017)
11/11/2017Court denied defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, rejecting their argument that the non-signatory plaintiff was a third-party beneficiary of the written agreement and therefore required to arbitrate. Court explained that a signatory to an agreement seeking to arbitrate with a non-signatory must establish one of five theories—that is, (i) incorporation by reference, (ii) assumption, (iii) agency, (iv) veil-piercing/alter ego, and (v) estoppel—and that simply being a third-party beneficiary is not sufficient. Court further concluded that, even if the arbitration agreement could be enforced, it did not encompass plaintiff’s claims, which arose from actions separate from the agreement.
-
Kershaw, P.C. v. Shannon L. Spangler P.C., No. 1:16-CV-01351-MEH (D. Colo. Nov. 10, 2016)
11/10/2017Court granted application to confirm arbitration award, finding that it had not been demonstrated that the arbitrator exceeded his authority or acted in manifest disregard of the law.
-
Tellez v. Madrigal, No. 3:15-CV-00304-KC (W.D. Tex. Nov. 9, 2017)
11/09/2017Court denied motion to stay arbitration, finding that (i) litigation-conduct waiver of arbitration is presumptively an issue for the court to decide; (ii) litigation conduct-waiver was not addressed in arbitration agreement; and (iii) defendant waived right to move to compel arbitration by substantially invoking the judicial process through his detailed and substantive motion to dismiss and related filings, and these actions prejudiced the plaintiff through delays and costs.
-
Daley v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-02693-JCM-CWH (D. Nev. Nov. 9, 2017)
11/09/2017Court granted motions to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that an arbitration agreement exists that vests the power to rule on the question of arbitrability in an arbitrator.
-
Daley v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-02693-JCM-CWH (D. Nev. Nov. 9, 2017)11/09/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case. Court found that there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties that required them to arbitrate any employment-related claims. Because plaintiff’s discrimination claims fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement and the question of arbitrability was one for the arbitrator, the court granted the motion to compel arbitration.
-
Dillard v. Dolgen Corp. LLC, No. 1:17-CV-00112-NCT-JFP (M.D.N.C. Nov. 9, 2017)
11/09/2017Magistrate judge recommended that defendant’s motion to compel arbitration be granted. Plaintiff brought claims alleging discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Court found that defendant’s claims were subject to arbitration pursuant to a valid arbitration agreement that the plaintiff had signed when presented with his employment documents.
-
Employment Solutions Management, Inc. v. Partners Personnel-Central Valley, Corp., No. 8:17-CV-01044-JLS-JCG (C.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2017)11/08/2017
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, finding that the court, rather than the arbitrator, should determine whether the parties had agreed to arbitrate, that the defendants were third-party beneficiaries under either Delaware or California law and thus able to compel arbitration, and that plaintiff’s claims fell within the scope of the arbitration clause
-
Hart v. Charter Communications, No. 8:17-CV-00556-DOC (C.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2017)
11/08/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that (i) reference in billing statement to new terms of service containing arbitration was reasonably conspicuous; (ii) entity resulting from merger may invoke pre-merger entity’s right to arbitration; and (iii) issues of arbitrability were expressly delegated to the arbitrator.
-
Aptim v. Dorsey McCall, No. 2:17-CV-08081-JTM-MBN (E.D. La. Nov. 8, 2017)
11/08/2017Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stayed the proceeding pending the arbitration’s resolution. Court found that the arbitration agreement contained in an employment contract between the parties was not illusory or procedurally unconscionable. Court also found that whether defendant had breached the arbitration agreement in such a way that precluded it from enforcing it was a question for the arbitrator and not the court.
-
Laurich v. Red Lobster Restaurants, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-00150-JB-KRS (D.N.M. Nov. 8, 2017)
11/08/2017Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stayed the proceeding pending the arbitration’s resolution. Court found that the arbitration agreement contained in an employment contract between the parties was not illusory or procedurally unconscionable. Court also found that whether defendant had breached the arbitration agreement in such a way that precluded it from enforcing it was a question for the arbitrator and not the court.
-
Conde v. Open Door Marketing, LLC, No. 4:15-CV-04080-KAW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2017)
11/08/2017Court stayed defendant’s motion to compel arbitration pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Ernst & Young LLP v. Morris. Plaintiffs brought the case following a labor dispute over misclassification as independent contractors and resulting wages. At issue is whether an arbitration agreement signed by the plaintiffs is valid given the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Morris v. Ernst & Young, which states that class action waivers in employment agreements are illegal under the NLRA.
-
Delta Stone Products, Inc. v. Eurostone Machine USA, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-00737-TS (D. Utah Nov. 8, 2017)
11/08/2017Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss or for summary judgment and instead stayed the case pending arbitration. The parties had entered into a sales contract for the supply of stone in a time-sensitive project, but initiated the present case when there were delays that allegedly led to lost profits and other damages. However, court found that the arbitration clause within the sales contract was valid and the issues at hand were within its scope, and thus compelled the parties to arbitrate their dispute.
-
Shakman v. Democratic Organization of Cook County, No. 1:69-CV-02145 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 8, 2017)
11/08/2017Court granted a plaintiffs’ motion to confirm an arbitration award and disagreed with defendant’s claims that the arbitrator had based his decision on gross errors of law and fact. The dispute arose out of a labor matter and the arbitrator issued a decision finding that this particular plaintiff had been subjected to unlawful retaliation after a Supplemental Relief Order was issued against defendant. Court found no reason to disturb the arbitrator’s findings and confirmed the award as well as an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.
-
Diversicare Leasing Corporation v. Hall, No. 16-6373 (6th Cir. Nov. 8, 2017)
11/08/2017Court of appeal dismissed Hall’s appeal of the district court’s decision to compel arbitration, noting that, except as “otherwise provided in Section 1292(b) of title 28, an appeal may not be taken from an interlocutory order” directing litigants to arbitrate their action. Therefore, the court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction over Hall’s appeal and granted Diversicare’s motion to dismiss.
-
Alvarez v. Banco Popular de Puerto Rico, Inc., No. 3:16-CV-02864-BJM (D.P.R. Nov. 7, 2017)
11/07/2017Court dismissed the claims against some of the defendants’ and instructed the parties to pursue them in arbitration pursuant to a valid arbitration agreement between the parties.
-
Trustees of the New York City District Council of Carpenters Pension Fund v. Coastal Environment Group, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-04667-KPF (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 7, 2017)11/07/2017
Court granted petitioners’ motion to confirm and enforce an arbitration award issued against the respondent pursuant to the Labor Management Relations Act. Because the respondent did not dispute any of the arbitrator’s findings or the contents of the award (and would not have had any ground to do so), the court confirmed the award. Court also awarded attorney’s fees and some of the costs to petitioners.
-
Noye v. Johnson & Johnson, No. 1:15-CV-02382-YK (M.D. Pa. Nov. 6, 2017)
11/06/2017Court granted one of the defendants’ renewed motion to compel arbitration and to stay the case pending completion of arbitration. Court found that plaintiff completed an online job application that included a valid arbitration agreement and therefore was forced to arbitrate his dispute with one of the defendants. In regards to a second defendant, the court refused to rule on a motion to compel arbitration and instead asked that the parties submit briefs regarding the applicability of equitable estoppel in light of recent Third Circuit case law.
-
Van den Heuvel v. Expedia Travel, No. 2:16-CV-00567-JAM-AC (E.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2017)
11/06/2017Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case. Court found that the parties had entered into a valid arbitration agreement when plaintiff purchased an airline ticket from defendant. Because the claims at issue were within the scope of that agreement, the parties were compelled to arbitrate and the case was dismissed.
-
Pyle v. VXI Global Solutions, Inc., No. 5:17-CV-00220-SL (N.D. Ohio Nov. 6, 2017)
11/06/2017Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the complaint. Plaintiff signed an arbitration agreement through which he agreed to submit any employment-related claims to arbitration and was therefore precluded from bringing the present collective action.
-
Zeringue v. Monster Energy Company, No. 2:17-CV-06023-SSV-JCW (E.D. La. Nov. 6, 2017)
11/06/2017Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the case. Plaintiff was an employee of defendant who had signed employment agreement that included a binding arbitration clause. Court found that plaintiff’s claim based on sexual harassment as a violation of the Civil Rights Act was within the scope of the arbitration clause.
-
Zakarin v. Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-01088-JMV-JBC (D.N.J. Nov. 3, 2017)
11/03/2017Court denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate a 2016 FINRA arbitration award and instead granted defendant’s motion to confirm the award. Court found that there were insufficient grounds on which to vacate, modify, or correct the award and therefore confirmed the award pursuant to 9 USC § 9.
-
Dome Technology, LLC v. Golden Sands General Contractors, Inc., No. 3:16-CV-01607-VAB (D. Conn. Nov. 3, 2017)
11/03/2017Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and stayed the case pending arbitration. Court found that two contracts at issue did not conflict with each other and that the parties had agreed to arbitrate claims within the scope of one of those contracts.
-
Patientpoint Royalty Holdings, Inc. v. Healthgrid Coordinated Care Solutions, Inc., No. 6:17-CV-01051-GAP-DCI (M.D. Fla. Nov. 3, 2017)11/03/2017
Court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, to compel arbitration. Court found that, while there was a valid arbitration clause between the parties, it was a narrow provision that did not cover the issues disputed in this case.
-
Holtec International v. Pandjiris Inc., No. 2:17-CV-00397-MPK (W.D. Pa. Nov. 3, 2017)11/03/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to stay all claims and compelled arbitration. According to the court, the terms and conditions in a purchase order between the parties contained a valid arbitration provision and therefore their dispute had to be arbitrated in Ohio. Additionally, the court held that in this case the theory of equitable estoppel did not apply to a non-signatory to the arbitration provision and therefore that third party was not forced to arbitrate.
-
Finger v. Jacobson, No. 2:17-CV-02893-JTM-DEK (E.D. LA. Nov. 2, 2017)11/02/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, holding that there was no enforceable arbitration agreement between plaintiff and defendants. Court rejected defendants’ argument that the arbitration agreement in an employment contract was broad enough to encompass a claim of fraudulent inducement to the contract against a non-signatory. Court found that plaintiff’s tort claims did not arise out of or rely on the terms of the employment agreement, and that plaintiff made no allegations of misconduct against the signatory.
-
Northeast Regional Council of Carpenters, et al. v. John Butler & Sons Construction LLC, No. 3:17-CV-02835-MAS-DEA (D.N.J. Nov. 2, 2017)11/02/2017
Court denied without prejudice motion to compel arbitration, requiring petitioners to refile their motion, holding that the motion incorrectly cited the date of the arbitral award, and that the arbitral award contained errors regarding dates of events in dispute. Court found that, in light of the obvious error in the arbitration award, petitioners must submit a legal brief in support of their motion, instead of a statement that no brief was necessary.
-
Edens v. Synovus Financial Corporation, No. 3:17-CV-00806-MBS (D.S.C. Nov. 2, 2017)11/02/2017
Court granted in part and denied in part motion to compel arbitration, holding that a binding arbitration agreement covered claims of fraud and misrepresentation brought by an investor company, but not claims of breach of fiduciary duty individually by the head of the company, and that the agreement was not void for unconscionability. Court found that the individual plaintiff was a sophisticated businessman and was not required to enter into the contract, and that a provision limiting punitive damages for both plaintiffs and defendants did not render the arbitration agreement unconscionable.
-
Enron Nigeria Power Holding, Ltd. V. Federal Republic of Nigeria, No. 1:13-CV-01106-CRC (D.D.C. Nov. 2, 2017)11/02/2017
Court granted in part motion for attorneys’ fees and nontaxable expenses, holding that plaintiff had established that it was entitled to an award under the contract that gave rise to the underlying dispute. Court found that plaintiff’s affidavits provided sufficient evidence to determine prevailing market rates for experienced commercial litigators in Houston, and that plaintiff’s counsel had established that he could command market rates.
-
Dennis v. United Van Lines, No. 4:17-CV-01614-RLW (E.D. Mo. Nov. 1, 2017)11/01/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, holding that equitable estoppel applied to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s disputes with defendant, who was not a party to the arbitration agreement. Court found that plaintiff’s claims depended on his classification as an independent contractor and the work he performed under an employment contract with a third party, which provided a broad arbitration clause. Court also found that, under the employment contract, plaintiff was an independent contractor and not an employee, and plaintiff did not fall within the FAA exclusion for contracts of employment for transportation workers.
-
Whaley v. Pacific Seafood Group, No. 1:10-CV-03057-MC (D. Or. Nov. 1, 2017)11/01/2017
Court granted motion to stay arbitration pending an appeal of an order appointing another federal judge as a replacement arbitrator, after the initial judge retired, holding that appellant had made sufficient showing that it may prevail on appeal. Court found that movant had raised a serious question as to whether parties intended to appoint the initial arbitrator, regardless of whether he remained a federal judge. Court found that parties could be harmed without a stay, as if the Ninth Circuit granted the appeal, parties would have wasted time and resources during arbitration in front of the replacement arbitrator.
-
Robledo v. Randstad US, L.P., No. 5:17-CV-01003-BLF (N.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2017)11/01/2017
Court granted motion to stay proceedings and terminated without prejudice motion to compel arbitration, holding that the outcome of the Supreme Court’s review of the decision in Morris v. Ernst & Young LLP, 834 F. 3d 975 (9th Cir. 2016) will directly impact the court’s determination of the motion to compel arbitration. Court found that motion required a determination of whether the National Labor Relations Act invalidates class action waivers, an issue currently pending before the Supreme Court. Court found plaintiffs had not shown that a stay of a few months prejudice plaintiffs and, conversely, that denying the stay would risk a waste of judicial resources.
-
Boyton v. Xerox Commercial Solutions LLC, No. 3:17-CV-505-RJC-DCK (W.D.N.C. Nov. 1, 2017)11/01/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, holding that motion was moot as defendants could re-file a similar motion in response to plaintiff’s amended complaint. Court found that plaintiff had filed a timely amended complaint, which superseded the original pleading and rendered defendant’s motion moot.
-
In the matter of Arbitration between Shepherd v. LPL Financial LLC, No. 5:17-CV-00150-D (E.D.N.C. Nov. 1, 2017)11/01/2017
Court granted motion to quash subpoenas of arbitrators in relation to plaintiffs’ petition to vacate an arbitration award. Court found that plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate clear evidence of impropriety to justify post-award discovery from an arbitrator. Court further found that the undisclosed relationship between a lawyer and the arbitrator was strictly professional, and the circumstances surrounding the arbitrator’s non-disclosures did not give the impression of clear impropriety, particularly when plaintiffs won the arbitral award unanimously. Court found that alleged impropriety by one arbitrator did not give grounds to “double-check” the other panelists.