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.
-
Griffin v. Senior Living Properties, LLC, 6:17-CV-00190-ILRL-KWR (E.D. Tex. Aug. 29, 2017)08/29/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings. Court rejected arguments that defendant had waived its right by failing to timely raise the issue, reasoning that defendant had acted defensively, promptly, and without prejudice to plaintiff; or was precluded from arbitrating because it failed to first seek mediation, finding that the mediation provisions of the agreement were not mandatory and had, in any event, been bypassed by plaintiffs themselves. Court likewise held that the arbitration agreement was not made unconscionable by its provisions concerning the applicable statute of limitations, limitations on discovery, or provision for attorney’s fees associated with compelling arbitration.
-
Axia NetMedia Corporation v. Massachusetts Technology Park Corporation, No. 4:17-CV-10482-TSH (D. Mass. Aug. 29, 2017)08/29/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, rejecting argument that the applicable arbitration agreement was illusory and thus invalid because it contained a unilateral right for defendant to elect arbitration.
-
Ford v. Combined Insurance Company of America, No. 5:17-CV-00103-RH-GRJ (N.D. Fla. Aug. 28, 2017)08/28/2017
Magistrate judge recommended that defendant’s motion to compel arbitration be granted, concluding that challenges to the contract itself were reserved for the arbitrator since a valid arbitral agreement existed. Although the original agreement was entered into between defendant’s parent company and plaintiff, court concluded the agreement applied to defendant-subsidiary, because the arbitration agreement explicitly indicated it included subsidiaries, successors and assigns.
-
Legacy Carbon, LLC v. Potter, No. 1:17-CV-00231-SOM-KSC (D. Hawaii Aug. 28, 2017)08/28/2017
Court denied without prejudice petition to compel arbitration against a third party, inviting petitioner to amend its submission with supplemental facts. Court held that it was within its power to determine whether claims against third party defendant were arbitrable because the parties to the arbitration agreement had not clearly delegated such decisions to the arbitrator. However, the court determined that it lacked sufficient basis in facts to determine whether the non-signatory third party (the president of an entity bound by the otherwise applicable arbitration agreement) could be compelled to arbitrate under theories of assumption, agency, and estoppel.
-
Hall v. The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-00193-JHM-CHL (W.D. Ky. Aug. 28, 2017)08/28/2017
Court held that under applicable state and federal precedent, beneficiaries’ claims for wrongful death were not subject to the arbitration agreement binding on the decedent. However, any claims arising from the decedent’s right were subject to arbitration based on a valid agreement to arbitrate entered into under power of attorney and, therefore, granted in part defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, staying all claims. Court rejected plaintiffs’ challenge to the validity of that arbitration agreement based on alleged deficiencies of that power of attorney.
-
Tierra Verde Escape, LLC v. The Brittingham Group, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-00100-GJQ-PJG (W.D. Mich. Aug. 28, 2017)08/28/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration in Hong Kong and stay proceedings, holding that it had the authority to compel a foreign arbitration because the envisaged performance was abroad. Court rejected challenges to the validity of the underlying memorandum of understanding as failing to contest the arbitration clause itself. Court also did not view the arbitration agreement’s reference to a non-existing arbitration association rules as fatal, holding this element to be severable from the underlying agreement to arbitrate.
-
Alvarez v. Amgen Manufacturing Limited, No. 3:16-CV-02205-PAD (D.P.R. Aug. 25, 2017)08/25/2017
Magistrate judge recommended the court grant defendant’s motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding the parties had entered into a valid arbitration agreement during the course of employment. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that after initially signing an arbitration agreement in 2006, she signed a new agreement in 2014 in which she opted out of the arbitration agreement, constituting a novation.
-
Allen v. Hartford Fire Insurance Company, No. 6:16-cv-01603-RBD-KRS (M.D. Fla. Aug. 25, 2017)08/25/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss labor claim without prejudice, holding that they had to be arbitrated instead. Court rejected plaintiffs’ contentions regarding the enforceability of the arbitration agreement, holding that the parties had manifested a clear intent to arbitrate any such questions of arbitrability by incorporating the AAA Employment Dispute Resolution Rules, which set out that the arbitrator shall have the power to arbitrate the validity of the underlying arbitration agreement.
-
Johnson v. Retirement Plan of General Mills, Inc, No. 4:16-CV-00151-TWP-TAB (S.D. Ind. Aug. 25, 2017)08/25/2017
District court overruled objections to Magistrate Judge’s Opinion and Order and granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration, rejecting an argument that the arbitration agreement was unsupported by consideration because it only required plaintiff to arbitrate her claims. Court further held that defendant could enforce the agreement as an affiliate of its signatory or, in the alternative, as a third party beneficiary that was intended to benefit from the agreement. Further, the court rejected arguments that a dispute over disability retirement benefits fell outside the broad scope the arbitration clause that covered “all” claims. Nor did the court find persuasive arguments that the agreement’s application had been waived, holding that defendant’s failure to respond to plaintiff’s query made after signing the agreement regarding its application to the disability claim did not constitute waiver and that defendant had not participated in litigation in a manner that would waive its rights to arbitrate.
-
JusTours, Inc. v. Bogenius Group, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-00078-GMN-CWH (D. Nev. Aug. 25, 2017)08/25/2017
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. Court held that the dispute was subject to the arbitration clause of the parties’ agreement, rejecting plaintiffs’ arguments that the agreement had been rescinded. Court likewise rejected plaintiffs’ argument that the arbitration clause was invalid as a matter of state law, holding that any such law was preempted by the FAA.
-
Rappley v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, No. 5:17-CV-00108-JGB-SP (C.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, holding that there was a valid arbitration agreement which covered plaintiff’s claims. Court found that plaintiff was not seeking public injunctive relief, as the class of persons plaintiff sought to represent was comprised of persons who were subjected to purportedly unlawful debt collection efforts; as such, there was no basis to conclude that enforcement of the arbitration agreement would violate fundamental California policy. Court found that the terms of the arbitration were broad and encompassed any statutory claims.
-
Rappley v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, No. 5:17-CV-00108-JGB-SP (C.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings, finding that ordering arbitration would not contravene a fundamental public policy of California and the arbitration provision encompassed the dispute.
-
Arctic Glacier USA, Inc. v. Principal Life Insurance Company, No. 8:17-CV-00214-RFR-MDN (D. Neb. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings. Court reasoned that plaintiffs, which were not signatories to the arbitration agreement with defendant, could nevertheless enforce under successor and third party beneficiary theories.
-
Re: Jersey Shore University Medical Center v. Local 5058 Health Professionals and Allied Employees, AFT/AFL-CIO, No. 3:16-CV-04840-MAS-DEA (D. N.J. August 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court declined to award attorney’s fees sought in connection with an action to enforce an arbitration award, holding that there was no evidence that the annulment challenge to the award had been in bad faith.
-
Mahamedi IP Law, LLP v. Paradice, No. 5:16-cv-02805-EJD (N.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the claim, finding that the dispute fell within the scope of a valid arbitration agreement. Court rejected plaintiffs’ proposal that it interpret the arbitration clause narrowly, reading it to have a broad application covering the dispute instead. Court rejected argument that defendant had waived its right to arbitrate by initiating an earlier action in state court, holding that the resulting dismissal without prejudice did not constitute a judgment on the merits and thus did not prejudice plaintiffs.
-
Developers Surety and Indemnity Co. v. Carothers Construction Inc., No. 2:17-CV-02292-JWL-KGG (D. Kan. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court denied both plaintiff’s motion to remand the case to state court and defendant’s motion to dismiss or transfer. Court, applying the tenth circuit rule in cases seeking to compel arbitration that courts should look to the possible award in the arbitration to determine the amount in controversy to this suit seeking to enjoin defendant’s arbitration, held that the jurisdictional amount to remain in federal court was satisfied as the defendant in arbitration sought an amount exceeding $75,000. Court further held that the plaintiff did not consent to arbitration of any claims on the bonds by defendant, the FAA did not require the plaintiff submit to arbitration of the underlying claims, and the plaintiff should not be estopped from opposing enforcement of the arbitration provision.
-
Opie v. CVS Caremark, No. 1:16-CV-00159-SPW-TJC (D. Mont. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and denied defendant’s motion to dismiss but granted its motion to compel arbitration. Court held that plaintiff consented to the arbitration agreement and that Montana’s reasonable expectations and fundamental rights rule did not apply here because the ninth circuit held the FAA preempts general state law contract defenses that have a disproportionate effect on arbitration.
-
Wolin v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., No. 2:15-CV-06996-LDW-AYS (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. Court held that it could not conclude that one plaintiff agreed to arbitrate any dispute and denied the motion to compel that plaintiff’s claims. Court granted the motion to compel arbitration as to the other plaintiff who did agree to the arbitration provision in the credit card agreement because the provision clearly covered that plaintiff’s claims.
-
Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc. v. Harkness, No. 2:17-CV-00222-PP (E.D. Wisc. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court granted plaintiff’s motion to confirm the arbitration award. Court found that it had subject matter and personal jurisdiction, the award had not been modified or vacated, and that defendant had not entered an appearance or responded to the motion to confirm.
-
Ace American Insurance Co. v. Guerriero, No. 2:17-CV-00820-CCC-JBC (D.N.J. Aug. 24, 2017)08/24/2017
Court granted plaintiff’s motion to compel arbitration, holding that the parties had a valid agreement to arbitrate, the defendant’s claims fell within the scope of the agreement, and the agreement was enforceable.
-
NTT DoCoMo, Inc. v. Tata Sons Limited, No. 1:16-CV-07809-PGG (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 23, 2017)08/23/2017
Court granted the parties’ joint request for an extension until December 31, 2017 of a stay of the proceedings reviewing an arbitral award. Shearman & Sterling is counsel for Tata Sons Limited in connection with this case.
-
Lancaster v. Comcast Communications Management LLC, No. 2:16-CV-14446-DPH-MKM (E.D. Mich. Aug. 23, 2017)08/23/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court held there was a valid and enforceable agreement to arbitrate and that plaintiff’s claims fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement.
-
GGNSC Louisville St. Matthews v. Grevious, No. 3:16-CV-00829-DJH (W.D. Ky. Aug. 23, 2017)08/23/2017
Court granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel arbitration. Court held that it had jurisdiction and, on balance, abstention in favor of state court was not warranted. Court then held the parties were compelled to arbitrate the claims asserted by defendant in state court pursuant to the terms of an alternative dispute resolution agreement and stayed the case pending arbitration.
-
Fowler v. Omnova Solutions, No. 1:16-CV-00160-NBB-DAS (N.D. Miss. Aug 22, 2017)08/22/2017
Court granted plaintiff’s summary judgment motion demanding arbitration. Court held plaintiff’s claim fell within the scope of the arbitration provision in the employment agreement between the parties, that arbitration was mandatory, not permissive, and that plaintiff’s inability to submit his claim to the company grievance committee did not preclude his demand for arbitration.
-
Oracle Corp. v. Wilson, No. 1:17-CV-00554-ER (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 2017)08/22/2017
Court denied petitioner’s motion to vacate an arbitration award and respondent’s request to modify the rate of interest applied to the award. Court held that vacatur under §10(a)(3) of the FAA was unwarranted as there was no evidence that the arbitrator prevented petitioner from presenting pertinent and material evidence before issuing the award. Court further held that modification of the award pursuant to Section 11 of the FAA to reflect a pre-judgment statutory interest rate of 9 percent under New York Law instead of the arbitrator’s award of 3 percent was unwarranted as the court should not replace the judgment of the arbitrator with its own judgment.
-
Chand v. Checksmart Financial LLC, No. 3:17-CV-03895-JSC (N.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2017)08/22/2017
Court granted defendant’s unopposed motion to compel arbitration, holding plaintiff agreed to arbitrate his claims and that the arbitration policy was not unconscionable.
-
Beckham v. Copart of Connecticut, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-00603-CMC (D.S.C. Aug. 22, 2017)08/22/2017
Court adopted the magistrate judge’s report recommending that defendant’s motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s complaint be granted and granted the motion. Court held that plaintiff signed and agreed to be bound by her employer’s dispute resolution policy and agreement.
-
Dialysis Access Center, LLC v. RMS Lifeline, Inc., No. 3:13-CV-01796-PAD (D. P.R. Aug. 22, 2017)08/22/2017
Court adopted the magistrate judge’s report recommending that plaintiff’s petition to vacate be denied and affirmed the arbitration award in favor of the defendant. Court held that the Magistrate Judge’s findings and conclusions were well supported.
-
Hispasat, S.A. v. Bantel Telecom, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-20534-KMW (S.D. Fla. Aug. 22, 2017)08/22/2017
Court adopted the magistrate judge’s report recommending that petitioner’s petition to confirm and enforce a foreign arbitral award be granted. Court found that respondent filed no objections to the report and that respondent’s argument that the mediator should have recused was without merit.
-
Rite Aid of New York, Inc. v. 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, No. 16-3342 (2d Cir. Aug. 22, 2017)08/22/2017
Court of appeal affirmed district court judgment confirming arbitration award in part. Court held district court did not err in denying petition to vacate an arbitration award, but dismissed the appeal from the grant of attorneys’ fees for lack of appellate jurisdiction as the district court did not compute the fees owed and therefore that order was not final and ripe for review.
-
Rahm v. TCF National Bank, No. 4:17-CV-04018-LLP (D.S.D. Aug. 21, 2017)08/21/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court held that the parties entered into a valid agreement to arbitrate under South Dakota contract law and that plaintiff’s employment claims should be sent to arbitration.
-
Roman v. UBS Financial Services, Inc. of Puerto Rico, No. 3:12-CV-01663-CCC (D.P.R. Aug. 21, 2017)08/21/2017
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, holding that a valid agreement containing an arbitration provision existed between the parties, the defendants were entitled to invoke the arbitration clause, and the plaintiffs’ claim fell within the clause and must be arbitrated.
-
Kangsong Ye v. Fujian South Coast Bioengineering Co., Ltd., No. 2:16-CV-04385-TJH-JEM (C.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2017)08/21/2017
Court granted petitioners’ ex parte application for post judgment relief. Court allowed petitioners to enforce its amended order of June 28, 2017 confirming a China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) award of an equity transfer of Renminbi $25 million in corporate stock. Court held respondent failed to comply with the order, that future attempts to enforce the award would be futile, that respondent’s corporate shares were located where the corporation is located (within the district), and that respondent’s shares should be conveyed by the issuance of new share certificates to petitioners in partial satisfaction of the court’s prior order.
-
Maynard v. Valley Christian Academy, Inc., No. 5:16-CV-01889-KBB (N.D. Ohio Aug. 21, 2017)08/21/2017
Magistrate judge granted defendant’s motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration, holding plaintiff’s five theories of unenforceability of her employment contract were not persuasive as the arbitration clause between the parties was valid and should be enforced.
-
Rivera-Colon v. AT&T Mobility Puerto Rico, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-01675-FAB (D.P.R. Aug. 21, 2017)08/21/2017
Court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, finding that pursuant to the FAA and first circuit precedent there was a valid agreement to arbitrate, the moving party was entitled to invoke the arbitration clause, the third-party was bound by the agreement, and the claim fell within the scope of the clause. As all claims were arbitrable, the court dismissed the case with prejudice.
-
Hagan v. Katz Communications, Inc., No. 1:12-CV-05987-RA (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 18, 2017)08/18/2017
Court denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of court’s order denying petitioner’s motion to vacate an arbitral award entered in favor of respondent. Court held that petitioner’s three arguments for reconsideration lacked merit as the first two reiterated her prior argument and the third was inapplicable as the arbitrator’s decision was not an abuse of his authority and did not manifestly disregard federal law.
-
Enron Nigeria Power Holding, Ltd. v. Federal Republic of Nigeria, No. 1:13-CV-1106-CRC (D.D.C. Aug. 18, 2017)08/18/2017
Court denied petitioner’s motion for attorney’s fees and nontaxable expenses associated with enforcing an ICC arbitral award against Nigeria, concluding that petitioner did not adequately support the reasonableness of its fee request. Court also declined petitioner’s request for fees incurred from the United Kingdom enforcement action, finding that English courts would be better positioned to assess the reasonableness of the fees and necessity of the parallel enforcement action and questioning whether the court even has jurisdiction to order a fee award for an action in a foreign court.
-
Citigroup, Inc. v. Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, No. 1:17-CV-01528-PKC (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 18, 2017)08/18/2017
Court granted parties’ requests to confirm an ICDR arbitration award pursuant to the §203 of the FAA and the New York Convention.
-
In re Application for an Order Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to Conduct Discovery for Use in a Foreign Proceeding, No. 1:17-MC-01466-BAH (D.D.C. Aug. 18, 2017)08/18/2017
Court denied request to issue subpoenas under 28 USC § 1782 for deposition testimony and production of documents for use in an appeal to reinstate arbitral awards totaling over $50 billion issued against the Russian Federation in an ongoing proceeding in the Court of Appeal of The Hague. Although the request fulfilled the statute’s mandatory requirements, the court exercised its discretion to deny the application, concluding that the request’s relevance to the appellate proceedings was tenuous and the burden on the witnesses would be substantial. Shearman & Sterling is counsel for petitioners in connection with this case.
-
CRM Limited v. Supreme Risk Management FZE, No. 1:16-CV-01344-AJT-MSN (E.D. Va. Aug. 18, 2017)08/18/2017
Court granted motion for issuance of subpoenas and letters of request and granted in part motion to extend time to complete discovery to determine whether the court has jurisdiction to enforce an arbitral award issued by the Dubai International Arbitration Center.
-
A. Miner Contracting, Inc. v. Dana Kepner Company, Inc., No. 16-15209 (9th Cir. Aug. 17, 2017)08/17/2017
Court of appeal affirmed denial of petition to vacate arbitration award, holding that the petition was time barred by § 12 FAA, that equitable tolling did not apply, and that appellant had not shown evident partiality in the arbitrator. Court found appellant did not act with due diligence in discovering information earlier that was freely available online. Court found that a connection with the attorney for appellant’s opponent in an unrelated litigation was too attenuated and insubstantial to create the necessary impression of partiality required by §10(a)(2) FAA.
-
Netplanner Systems, Inc. v. GSC Construction Inc., No. 4:16-CV-00150-CDL (M.D. Ga. Aug. 17, 2017)08/17/2017
Court confirmed its prior ruling denying defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. Court held that defendants waived their right to compel arbitration by engaging in conduct inconsistent with insisting on their right to arbitrate the dispute, including waiting until the last minute before trial to raise the issue, which prejudiced the plaintiff.
-
Veolia Transportation Service, Inc. v. United Transportation Union, No. 16-16811 (11th Cir. Aug. 16, 2017)08/16/2017
Court of appeal affirmed lower court’s decision to grant summary judgment declining to vacate an arbitral award. Court held that, in light of the highly deferential standard of review applicable to arbitral awards, the plaintiff-appellant’s contentions are meritless.
-
Crespo v. Matco Tools Corp., No. 3:17-CV-01394-GAG (D.P.R. Aug. 15, 2017)08/15/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that parties had a valid agreement, plaintiffs’ claims fell within the scope of its clear and specific arbitration clause, and plaintiffs’ immediate termination did not trigger an exception to arbitration.
-
W.J. O’Neill Co. v. Shepley, Bulfinch, Richardson & Abbot, Inc., No. 16-2228 (6th Cir. Aug. 15, 2017)08/15/2017
Court of appeal affirmed district court’s grant of summary judgment, agreeing that claims were barred by collateral estoppel (issue preclusion), having been decided in an unconfirmed arbitration award. Court held that plaintiff had had a fair opportunity to actually litigate the issue raised. Court further confirmed that mutuality of estoppel (same party) requirements were relaxed where issue preclusion is asserted defensively.
-
Manios Properties LLC v. Riverport Insurance Company of California, No. 2:17-CV-01700 (D. Ariz. Aug. 15, 2017)08/15/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration and stay the case. Court found that pursuant to §2 of the FAA, the court must find that a valid agreement to arbitrate exists and that the agreement encompasses the dispute at issue. Here, while there was a valid agreement to arbitrate, it did not encompass the dispute at issue because the agreement only applies to the “meaning or effect of any provision,” not the parties’ dispute of when the loss occurred.
-
Cooper v. DST Systems, Inc., No. 1:16-CV-01900-WHP (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2017)08/15/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration finding that the claims at issue fall squarely within the scope of the arbitration agreement; and that the defendant, as a non-signatory to the arbitration agreement, may compel the plaintiff to arbitrate his claims under the doctrine of equitable estoppel.
-
Demuth v. Navient Solutions, LLC, No. 2:17-CV-00675-NBF (W.D. Pa. Aug. 15, 2017)08/15/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s attempt to confirm a AAA arbitration award, without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to challenge a final award. Court held that the motion to confirm the arbitration award was premature because defendant had availed itself of the AAA Optional Appellate Rules and the appeal proceedings were ongoing, therefore the award was not final and ripe for confirmation.
-
Pagano v. GFI Securities, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-04728 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 14, 2017)08/14/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, holding that there was an enforceable arbitration agreement between the parties which covered the dispute. Court found that the arbitration agreement was broad. Court found that whether res judicata and collateral estoppel precluded termination of employment was a merits argument that went beyond the threshold question of arbitrability, and that such arguments should be raised in arbitration.
-
Dell’Oro Group, Inc. v. Weckel, No. 3:17-CV-00750-JD (N.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2017)08/14/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and administratively closed the case. Court held the defendants did not waive their right to arbitration by engaging in litigation conduct comprised of a case management conference and the motion at issue, neither of which demonstrates that defendants acted inconsistently with their arbitration demand or prejudiced the plaintiff. Further, the non-signatory defendant is not absolutely barred from invoking the arbitration agreement since California law expressly allows non-signatories to enforce arbitration agreements on equitable estoppel grounds when the claims against the non-signatory “are dependent on or inextricably bound up with” the agreement featuring arbitration.