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.
-
Unitil Corporation and Northern Utilities, Inc. v. Utility Workers Union of America Local 341, No. 2:16-CV-00443-JAW (D. Me. Nov. 1, 2017)11/01/2017
Court denied motion to partially vacate an arbitration award on grounds that arbitrator acted outside her authority and made a manifest error of law, holding that this case did not meet the standard to disturb the award. Court found that the award was a reasonable response to the submissions, based on a plausible interpretation of the underlying contract and facts.
-
Goodwin v. Branch Banking & Trust Company, No. 17-1412 (4th Cir. Oct. 31, 2017)10/31/2017
Court affirmed decision to deny motion to compel arbitration, upholding the district court’s finding that the arbitration provision was unconscionable under state law and its refusal to sever unconscionable terms. Court did not provide further information on the facts of the case or what made the arbitration terms unconscionable and non-severable.
-
AFS Logistics, LLC v. Cochran, No. 3:16-CV-3139 (M.D. Tenn. Oct. 31, 2017)10/31/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration of claims concerning alleged misappropriation of trade secrets, holding that plaintiff had waived its right to arbitration. Court found plaintiff’s conduct inconsistent with any reliance on a right to arbitrate and that allowing plaintiff to now rely on an arbitration clause would substantially prejudice defendants.
-
Choice Hotels International, Inc. v. Patel, No. 8:17-CV-01260-TDC (D. Md. Oct. 30, 2017)10/30/2017
Court granted default judgment in application to confirm arbitration award, holding that the FAA requirements for confirmation were met. Court found that the claims for breach of contract were within the scope of the arbitration clause, that defendants were served and received notice of the motion, but failed to file an answer or otherwise make a showing of any grounds for vacating the award.
-
National Football League Management Council v. National Football League Players Association, No. 1:17-CV-06761-KPF (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 30, 2017)10/30/2017
Court denied the National Football League Players Association (“NFLPA”) motion for preliminary injunction and vacatur of an award which upheld the National Football League Commissioner’s six-game suspension of Ezekiel Elliott. Court found that the arbitrator gave the player ample opportunity, in terms of both proceedings and evidence, to challenge the Commissioner’s decision before the arbitrator, and that the arbitration agreement did not permit the arbitrator to compel testimony from certain witnesses.
-
Egan Jones Ratings Company v. Steven Pruette, No. 2:16-MC-00105-JLS (E.D. Pa. Oct. 30, 2017)10/30/2017
Court denied petition to vacate partial final arbitration award on liability, and confirmed cross-petition to confirm award. Court found authorities were split on the applicability of a statute of limitations defense to an arbitration proceeding, and arbitrator’s failure to reach this defense was not a manifest disregard of the law. Court also found that arbitrator’s contractual interpretation was based on a proper weighing of conflicting evidence, and that the arbitrator limited his determination to breach of contract, thus remaining within the scope of his authority.
-
Global eBusiness Services, Inc. v. Interactive Brokers LLC, No. 3:16-CV-01264-JD (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2017)10/30/2017
Court denied petition to vacate arbitration award issued by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”), holding that plaintiff had not established any of the limited grounds in FAA § 10. Court found that plaintiff provided no evidence to show that arbitrators refused to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy in order to satisfy FAA § 10(a)(3). Court also found that plaintiff had not identified any governing law that was arguably even incorrectly applied by the panel, and could not therefore meet the standard of FAA § 10(a)(4).
-
Edmund I. Shamsi v. Ofer Levin, G.T.I. Global Ltd., No. 9:17-CV-80372-DMM (S.D. Fla. Oct. 27, 2017)10/27/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration of all claims and stay action, rejecting the plaintiff’s argument that a single defendant cannot enforce the arbitration agreement as a non-signatory. Court held that the equitable estoppel exception to the general rule that only signatories to an arbitration agreement can enforce the agreement applied, because all claims “arise out of and relate directly” to the joint venture agreement in which the arbitration agreement is contained and each claim “raises allegations of substantially interdependent and concerted misconduct” against both a signatory and non-signatory based on “inherently inseparable” facts.
-
Holsum Bakery Incorporated v. Bakery, Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers, Local 232, No: 16-16422 (9th Cir. Oct. 27, 2017)
10/27/2017Court of appeal reversed and remanded a district court’s decision to vacate an arbitration award. Court also instructed the district court to confirm the award because it had erred in concluding that the arbitrator’s award did not “draw its essence” from the collective bargaining agreement at issue. Court also found that the district court erred in concluding that the arbitrator’s award was “so inconsistent and full of mistakes” that it was practically impossible to apply.
-
Letom Management Inc. v. Centaur Gaming, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-03793-PAE (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2017)10/27/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss, holding that it had no jurisdiction over the defendant. Court found that defendant’s “waiver” of an arbitration process, which would have applied Indiana Law, by electing to apply New York choice of law in its brief seeking dismissal did not grant specific jurisdiction. Court found that defendant had to rely on New York authorities, as plaintiff had filed in the SDNY, and rejected plaintiff’s contention that this amounted to the defendant availing itself of the laws of New York.
-
Lifetree Trading PTE., Ltd. V. Washakie Renewable Energy, No. 1:14-CV-09075-JPO (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2017)10/27/2017
Court denied motion for a stay, pending the appeal of a decision to deny a motion to compel arbitration, holding that defendant had waived its right to arbitrate. Court found that (i) the case had been in federal court for almost three years, (ii) the litigation was in its advanced stages, with trial scheduled in one month’s time, (iii) defendant had engaged in prejudicial and sanctionable conduct to prolong the litigation, and (iv) defendant had twice explicitly submitted to the court’s jurisdiction, and had engaged in discovery practice without taking steps to bifurcate the case.
-
Johnson & Johnson International v. Puerto Rico Hospital Supply, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-01405-FAB (D.P.R. Oct. 26, 2017)
10/26/2017Court denied motion for reconsideration of opinion and order compelling arbitration and staying all claims pending completion of arbitration, holding that plaintiffs’ arguments were based on formerly available evidence or arguments which had already been submitted to the court in earlier motions.
-
International Longshore v. Columbia Grain, Inc., No. 15-35620 (9th Cir. Oct. 25, 2017)10/25/2017
Court affirmed decision to deny motion to compel arbitration, holding that the question of whether there was an agreement to arbitrate was for the court, not the arbitrator, to decide, and that plaintiff’s claim to compel arbitration was foreclosed by settlement. Court found that a memorandum of agreement between the union and plaintiff, which settled “any and all claims” by members, foreclosed plaintiff’s claim to compel arbitration of its grievances.
-
MacRury v. American Steamship Company, No. 1:16-CV-13889-TLL-PTM (E.D. Mich. Oct. 25, 2017)
10/25/2017Court granted motion to lift stay on proceedings pending arbitration upon being presented with an amended claim alleging facts falling outside the scope of an existing arbitration. Court reasoned that for such related, but independent claims, arbitration was not appropriate.
-
Blair v. Rent-A-Center, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-02335-WHA (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2017)
10/25/2017Court granted in part and denied in part a motion to compel arbitration, and declined to stay remaining proceedings. Court held that although a valid arbitration agreement governed the dispute, it was inoperable with respect to those claims subject to state laws whose public purpose would be contravened by an agreement to arbitrate. Court declined to issue a stay pending arbitration of the claim not subject to such laws upon finding that the applicable law was sufficiently distinct and any overlap between the arbitrable and nonarbitrable claims was “minor.”
-
Thomas v. Progressive Leasing, No. 1:17-CV-01249-RDB (D. Md. Oct. 25, 2017)
10/25/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case, holding that plaintiff who was not a signatory to the arbitration agreement could nevertheless be bound thereby under a theory of equitable estoppel since he had benefited from the primary contract.
-
Curtis International Ltd v. Pacific Logistics Corp., No. 2:17-CV-01968-PA-JEM (C.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2017)
10/25/2017Court granted joint motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the case, finding that a valid arbitration agreement governed the dispute.
-
Pierre-Louis v. CC Solutions, LLC, No. 0:17-CV-60781-BB (S.D. Fla. Oct. 25, 2017)
10/25/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings. Court held that defendants had not waited so long to assert their right to arbitrate as to have waived it, notwithstanding some small prejudice to plaintiff.
-
Choice Hotels International , Inc. v. Gurnee Property Management, Inc., No. 8:17-CV-00225-PX (D. Md. Oct. 24, 2017)
10/24/2017Court granted default motion to confirm an arbitral award, finding no reason to vacate it. Court likewise granted plaintiff’s motion for the costs of bringing an action to confirm the award, noting that the law did not provide for post-judgment interest and thus declining to award it.
-
Tate v. Progressive Finance Holdings, LLC., No. 2:17-CV-01589-ODW-AS (C.D. Cal. Oct. 24, 2017)
10/24/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case. Court held that the otherwise uncontested arbitration agreement was broad enough to cover the dispute. Based on that finding, court, as a matter of discretion, declined to stay proceedings and dismissed the claim.
-
Noonan v. Comcast Corp., No. 3:16-CV-00458-PGS-LHG (D.N.J. Oct. 24, 2017)
10/24/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings, determining that the language of the parties’ agreement indicated that they intended to arbitrate and that their dispute fell within the scope of that agreement.
-
Manor v. Copart, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-02585 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 24, 2017)
10/24/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings. Court declined to consider arguments that defendants had waived the right to arbitrate by waiting to invoke the agreement or that they were estopped from arbitrating by an alleged failure to disclose the existence of the agreement to plaintiff, reasoning that this was for the arbitrator to decide. Court likewise rejected plaintiff’s argument that defendants could not benefit from the arbitration agreement because one was not her employer and the other was not a signatory thereto.
-
Madrigal v. Zuniga, No. 1:16-CV-09415-RMB-JS (D.N.J. Oct. 23, 2017)
10/23/2017Court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint for enforcement of an arbitration decision by the New Jersey Fee Arbitration Committee, inter alia, for lack of jurisdiction. Court determined that there was no diversity of citizenship among the parties and ruled that the FAA does not create independent federal question jurisdiction.
-
Marcario v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., No. 2:17-CV-00414-ADS-ARL (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 23, 2017)
10/23/2017Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed the case. Court held that a valid arbitration agreement applied to the dispute and that defendants benefited from the agreement as assignees of the underlying contract. Court rejected plaintiff’s claims that he had never received such an agreement, holding that plaintiff had made a contrary judicial admission at an earlier point and, in any case, that defendants had sufficiently demonstrated the agreement’s existence and transmission to plaintiff.
-
In re Application of Hulley Enterprises Ltd., No. 2:17-CV-07100-PA-E (C.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2017)
10/23/2017Court declined to reverse magistrate’s denial of petitioners’ motion for leave to serve a subpoena by “alternative means” in 28 USC 1782 application, ruling that it was neither “clearly erroneous” nor “contrary to law.” Shearman & Sterling is counsel for the petitioners in this case.
-
Micula v. Government of Romania, No. 15-3109-CV (2d Cir. Oct. 23, 2017)10/23/2017
Court reversed and vacated district court orders and judgment confirming in ex parte proceedings an ICSID arbitration award against a sovereign state, and remanding the case with instructions to dismiss the petition without prejudice. Court held that the district court erred in determining that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act did not apply to proceedings to confirm ICSID awards and that venue in the Southern District of New York is not proper under that act.
-
Banks v. Barclays Bank Credit Services, No. 1:17-CV-00096-CCC-SES (M.D. Pa. Oct. 20, 2017)10/20/2017
Court adopted magistrate’s recommendation and denied motion to compel arbitration without prejudice, granting discovery limited to the question of the validity of the purported arbitration agreement. Court reasoned that precedent required such discovery where underlying agreement was not clear with respect to arbitration.
-
Richards v. The Krystal Company, No. 1:17-CV-00228-TAV-CHS (E.D. Tenn. Oct. 20, 2017)10/20/2017
Court denied motion to remand, ruling that the parties must arbitrate the validity of the underlying agreement instead. Court held that the agreement indicated the parties’ intent to delegate arbitrability questions to the arbitrator.
-
Nelson v. Synchrony Bank, No. 2:16-CV-00703-UA-MRM (M.D. Fla. Oct. 20, 2017)10/20/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration. Court held that plaintiff had waived its right to arbitrate by waiting to file its motion for over a year and substantively participating in litigation during the interim, both factors that prejudiced the plaintiff.
-
Mason v. Athletic & Therapeutic Institute OF Naperville, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-02222-JMS-MJD (S.D. Ind. Oct. 19, 2017)10/19/2017
Court dismissed claim, finding that an arbitration agreement governed the dispute. Court rejected arguments that the arbitration agreement was unenforceable because it imposed a time limit on filing a claim and did not mandate that attorney’s fees be awarded to the prevailing party.
-
Richland Equipment Company, Inc. v. Deere & Company, No. 5:17-CV-00088-KS-MTP (S.D. Miss. Oct. 19, 2017)10/19/2017
Court denied motion for an injunction pending appeal of its earlier order compelling arbitration. Court reasoned that although delegation agreements need not be enforced by courts where the dispute plainly falls outside that agreement, the plaintiff could not meet its burden to demonstrate that this was the case.
-
Emerson Software Solutions, Inc. v. Regions Financial Corp., No. 2:17-CV-00287-JHE (N.D. Ala. Oct. 19, 2017)10/19/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings. Court held that the arbitration agreement was sufficiently broad to cover the claim in dispute and that plaintiff had expressly waived any equitable relief.
-
Huitt v. Wilbanks Securities, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-00919-STV (D. Colo. Oct. 19, 2017)10/19/2017
Court granted motion to confirm arbitration award. Court rejected arguments that award was not valid, reasoning that the challenged jurisdictional question was within the tribunal’s competence, that defendant had not demonstrated the tribunal had manifestly disregarded the law, and that the tribunal was not obligated to explain its award of punitive damages.
-
Roundtree v. Primeflight Aviation Services, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-9609-CCC-MF (D.N.J. Oct. 19, 2017)10/19/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the complaint. Court dismissed plaintiffs’ argument that the arbitration agreement was not valid because it did not sufficiently make clear that by agreeing to arbitrate they waived their right to a jury, as required by New Jersey law. Court further held that the agreement was sufficiently broad to cover the dispute.
-
BSH Hausgerate, GMBH v. Kamhi, No. 1:17-CV-05776 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 18, 2017)10/18/2017
Court granted motion to confirm the attachment of real property in support of payment on a $ 2.7 million ICC award. Court held that all grounds for an attachment of property were met, rejecting respondent’s contention that the award might not be confirmed because of its challenges to underlying notice and procedure.
-
Driver v. Pro AG Management, Inc., No. 3:16-CV-01959 (M.D. Tenn. Oct. 18, 2017)10/18/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings, holding the parties were bound by a valid arbitration agreement.
-
Espinoza v. Galardi South Enterprises, Inc., No. 14-CV-21244-JG (S.D. Fla. Oct. 17, 2017)10/17/2017
Court granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel arbitration. Court rejected defendant’s argument that plaintiffs should be estopped from compelling arbitration based on their earlier opposition to arbitration. Court also found that the defendant’s inability to pay the arbitration costs of the arbitration vendor they selected was not a legitimate basis for the court to refuse to enforce the arbitration agreement.
-
McFadden v. E.A. Renfroe & Company, Inc., No. 15-55886 (9th Cir. Oct. 17, 2017)10/17/2017
Court of appeal reversed district court’s ruling that arbitration agreement is unenforceable, finding that unconscionable terms were severable.
-
Bankwitz v. Ecolab, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-02924-EMC (N.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2017)10/17/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration in light of ninth circuit decision in Morris v. Ernst & Young LLP holding that arbitration agreements requiring employees to pursue work-related claims individually are unenforceable, but stayed proceedings pending outcome of appeal of Morris before Supreme Court.
-
Hawkins v. Fishbeck, No. 3:17-CV-00032 (W.D. Va. Oct. 16, 2017)10/16/2017
Court granted in part motion to compel arbitration, finding that the agreement containing the arbitration clause was sufficiently related to the claims at issue.
-
Anderson Group Co., Inc. v. MC Hotels, LLC, No. 0:17-CV-01564-TLW (D.S.C. Oct. 16, 2017)10/16/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss to the extent it seeks to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s claims. Court held that the relevant provision in the subcontract provided for arbitration, and whether the same provision required the parties to mediate as a condition precedent to arbitration was a matter for the arbitrators to decide.
-
U.S. Pipelining LLC v. Johnson Controls, Inc., No. 16-00132 HG-RLP (D. Haw. Oct. 16, 2017)
10/16/2017Court denied plaintiff’s motion to stay arbitration and granted defendant’s countermotion to stay judicial proceedings, concluding that defendant did not waive its right to arbitration by moving for summary judgment a year before it demanded arbitration. Court noted that the motion for summary judgment challenged plaintiff’s right to bring suit, and defendant has consistently stated that plaintiff’s claims are subject to arbitration and that it retains the right to seek arbitration. Court further concluded that plaintiff was not prejudiced by defendant’s actions, as (i) the motion for summary judgment did not involve the merits of the claims subject to arbitration, (ii) plaintiff was on notice that defendant intended to seek arbitration, and (iii) plaintiff failed to demonstrate how it had been prejudiced by the limited discovery that had taken place in the case.
-
Kirby McInerney LLP v. Lee Medical, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-04760-KBF (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 16, 2017)10/16/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case, holding that a valid arbitration agreement governed the dispute.
-
Harper v. Academy of Training School, LLC, No. 2:16-CV-01266-UDJ-KK (W.D. La. Oct. 16, 2017)10/16/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendant had waived its right to arbitrate by substantially invoking the judicial process, including by filing an answer, briefing motions, and engaging in written discovery.
-
McArthur v. BNSF Railway Company, No. 17-CV-01314-JCC (W.D. Wash. Oct. 16, 2017)10/16/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss in favor of arbitration, finding that terminated employee’s claim for compensation for unused vacation time required interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement and could only be resolved in arbitration.
-
Hawkins v. Fishbeck, No. 3:17-CV-00032-NKM-JCH (W.D. Va. Oct. 16, 2017)10/16/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss in part and compelled arbitration, finding that trade secret and copyright infringement claims fell within the scope of an arbitration agreement.
-
World of Beer Franchising, Inc. v. MWB Development I, LLC, No. 17-12870 (11th Cir. Oct. 16, 2017)10/16/2017
Court of appeal affirmed district court’s denial of preliminary injunction pending arbitration, finding that under contractual scheme, court motion for preliminary injunction could only be brought simultaneously with arbitration, and after mediation had concluded.
-
Knezovich v. DIRECTV, L.L.C., No. 4:17-CV-00165-MWB (D. Idaho Oct. 13, 2017)10/13/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismissed claim, finding that arbitration procedure containing provisions governing the scope of arbitrable claims was validly incorporated by reference in an arbitration agreement, even if it was not provided to employee at time of signing.
-
Ruiz v. AH 2005 Management, No. 3:17-CV-00197-PRM (W.D. Tex. Oct. 13, 2017)10/13/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss and compelled arbitration, finding that employer’s right to amend arbitration agreement did not render it illusory, since it applied only to prospective disputes.
-
Cheytac USA, LLC v. Nextgen Tactical, LLC and Omanoff, No. 0:17-CV-60925-CMA (S.D. Fla. Oct. 12, 2017)10/12/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that because the parties incorporated the AAA rules into their agreement the question of whether a valid arbitration agreement existed was an issue for arbitration. Court also found the question of whether the carve-out provision removed claims from an arbitrator’s jurisdiction was also an issue for arbitration. Court held defendants had not waived their right to arbitrate the dispute.