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.
-
Burgos v. Trans Union, LLC, No. 2:16-CV-06338-JCJ (E.D. Pa. May 18, 2017)05/18/2017
Court granted the parties a thirty day period to supplement the record regarding a pending motion to compel arbitration. Court held that, after finding that the parties had entered into an arbitration agreement, the agreement was not unconscionable and that defendant waived its right to enforce the agreement. However, the court concluded that it required further input from the parties regarding the appropriate standard to rule on motions to compel arbitration.
-
Greenway Energy, LLC v. Ardica Tech., Inc., No. 1:17-819-RMG (D.S.C. May 17, 2017)05/17/2017
Court ordered parties to arbitrate their dispute and dismissed the complaint. Because the parties agreed that all claims arising out of the contract must be arbitrated, court held that the only issues before the court were selection of the arbitral forum and the arbitrator, which the court duly selected. Court dismissed complaint given that entire dispute was within the scope of the arbitration clause.
-
Jacks v. CMH Homes, Inc., No. 15-6197 (10th Cir. May 17, 2017)05/17/2017
Court of appeals affirmed decision to deny motion to compel arbitration, holding that non-signatory beneficiaries were not bound by an arbitration agreement where they had neither accepted the benefit nor sought to enforce the terms of the contract. Court found no authority for binding the non-signatory beneficiaries under contract law, and estoppel did not apply where a signatory defendant sought to compel arbitration with a non-signatory plaintiff.
-
North American Deer Registry, Inc. v. DNA Solutions, Inc., No. 4:17-CV-00062-ALM (E.D. Tex. May 16, 2017)05/16/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, holding that claims of unfair competition, misappropriation of trade secrets, constructive trust, and unjust enrichment fell outside the scope of the arbitration agreement. Court found that the scope of the arbitration clause was narrow, as parties had only agreed to arbitrate disputes “concerning the interpretation” of the contract.
-
Oberhansly v. Assoc. of Better Living and Education International, No. 1:15-CV-00073-PLM (W.D. Mich. May 16, 2017)05/16/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss, holding that the contract containing the arbitration agreement was valid and the arbitration clause was enforceable. Court found that the arbitration clause was broad and, in light of the presumption of enforceability, applied to all of plaintiff’s causes of action connected to the defendant’s facility, staff, and program.
-
Del Monte International, GMBH v. Ticofrut S.A., No. 1:16-CV-23894-JEM (S.D. Fla. May 16, 2017)05/16/2017
Court affirmed and adopted magistrate’s recommendation to deny request to garnish debt to satisfy an unconfirmed arbitral award which had not yet been converted to a judgment.
-
Vega v. New Forest Home Cemetary, LLC., No. 16-3119 (7th Cir. May 15, 2017)05/15/2017
Court reversed award of summary judgment, holding that the collective bargaining agreement did not “clearly and unmistakably” require an employee to exhaust the grievance procedure, which included arbitration, to resolve statutory claims. Court found that employee had independent statutory rights in addition to the contractual claims, and the law required a “clear and unmistakable” indication in the contract that statutory rights must be resolved through a contractual dispute resolution process.
-
Whitworth v. Solarcity Corp., No. 3:16-CV-01540-JSC (N.D. Cal. May 15, 2017)05/15/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration as to newly added plaintiffs, holding that employment arbitration agreements containing class action waivers are invalid and unenforceable under the National Labor Relations Act). Court found that it was bound by ninth circuit precedent which had reached this conclusion, and that the arbitration agreements contained unenforceable Private Attorney General Act, was prohibited by California law.
-
Battle v. Reinhart Foodservice Louisiana, LLC., No. 5:14-CV-03191-DEW-MLH (W.D. La. May 15, 2017)05/15/2017
Court denied motion to vacate the arbitration award and reopen the case, holding that plaintiff had failed to identify which of the exclusive grounds set forth in § 10 of the FAA justified the motion. Court found that the arbitrator’s award clearly demonstrated analysis of the text of the arbitration agreement and conclusions framed in terms of the contract’s meaning.
-
Kindred Nursing Centers Limited Partnership v. Clark, No. 16-32 (U.S. May 15, 2017)05/15/2017
Supreme Court reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded denial of motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, holding that Kentucky’s “clear-statement rule,” which requires a specific rather than a general grant of authority to enter into an arbitration agreement for someone else, violates the FAA by singling out arbitration agreements for disfavored treatment. Court found that the FAA applies not only to the enforcement of arbitration agreements, but also to questions of initial validity and formation.
-
Gaspar Salas v. GE Oil & Gas, No. 16-20379 (5th Cir. May 12, 2017)05/12/2017
Court vacated and remanded decision to withdraw prior order compelling arbitration, holding that (i) by withdrawing the order, the lower court did deny an application to compel arbitration, thus conferring FAA appellate jurisdiction, and (ii) that the district court lacked jurisdiction to withdraw its order compelling arbitration and reopen the case due to a default in the arbitral process. Court found that the order exceeded the court’s authority under the FAA, as it neither enforced nor determined the validity of the arbitration agreement.
-
Monongalia County Coal Co. v. United Mine Workers of America, No. 1:16-CV-00004-IMK (N.D.W. Va. May 12, 2017)05/12/2017
Court denied motion seeking reconsideration of order vacating arbitral award, holding there was no ambiguity in the arbitral award, and thus neither remand to the arbitrator nor judicial reconsideration were warranted. Court upheld the decision that the arbitrator’s finding that the work at issue was repair and maintenance, not construction, contradicted significant arbitral precedent.
-
Oliveira v. New Prime, Inc., No. 15-2364 (1st Cir. May 12, 2017)05/12/2017
Court of appeal affirmed district court’s order denying motion to compel arbitration and dismissed appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction, holding that (i) the applicability of the FAA is a threshold question for the court to determine before compelling arbitration; and (ii) § 1 of the FAA’s exemption for employment contracts of transportation workers applies to a transportation-worker agreement that establishes an independent-contractor relationship. Court found that whether § 1 of the FAA applies was a question of the district court’s authority to compel arbitration, not a question of arbitrability, and rejected a narrow reading of “contracts of employment.”
-
Long v. Miller, No. 0:17-CV-00424-DSD-FLN (D. Minn. May 11, 2017)05/11/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, holding that the question of arbitrability was one for the arbitrator, notwithstanding the absence of an arbitration clause in the loan documents underlying the disputed transaction. Court found that the parties had broadly agreed to arbitrate some disputes in related stock purchase agreements and the shareholder agreement, and had incorporated the AAA rules into their dispute resolution procedures, thereby evincing an intent to reserve the question of arbitrability to the arbitrator.
-
Waymo v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-00939-WHA (N.D. Cal. May 11, 2017)05/11/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, holding that defendants were not party to any applicable arbitration agreement, and that the doctrine of equitable estoppel did not apply. Court found that plaintiffs had not relied on their third party arbitration agreement, having only made reference to it, and defendants’ claims were not “dependent on or inextricably bound up with the contractual obligations of the agreement[s] containing the arbitration clause,” so as to trigger equitable estoppel.
-
Stockade Companies, LLC v. Kelly Restaurant Group, LLC, No. 1:17-CV-00143-RP (W.D. Tex. May 11, 2017)05/11/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration since it was not demonstrate by clear and unmistakable evidence that the parties agreed to arbitrate the question of arbitrability. However, court concluded trademark infringement, false designation of origin claims, and breach of non-competition covenant fell within the exclusion clause and the parties were not compelled to arbitrate.
-
Ross v. P.J. Pizza San Diego, LLC., No. 3:16-CV-02330-L-JMA (S.D. Cal. May 11, 2017)05/11/2017
Court denied defendants’ motion to compel plaintiff to submit his claims to arbitration on an individual basis. Pursuant to the FAA, court found the class action waiver invalid since it precluded the plaintiff from engaging in at least one of the concerted actions the National Labor Relations Act protects.
-
Ortiz v. Volt Management Corp., No. 4:16-CV-07096-YGR (N.D. Cal. May 11, 2017)05/11/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA. Court found arbitration agreement was slightly procedurally unconscionable but was not substantively unconscionable, and thus, was enforceable.
-
Lillegard v. Blatt, Hasenmiller, Leibsker & Moore, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-08075 (N.D. Ill. May 11, 2017)05/11/2017
Court denied defendants’ motion to compel arbitration without prejudice. Court held defendants had not waived their right to arbitration by their conduct in litigation; however, court determined that “genuine issues remained as to the existence of the parties’ agreement to arbitrate,” so it could not determine that the parties formed an arbitral agreement at that stage.
-
Anderson v. American General Insurance, No. 16-15909 (11th Cir. May 11, 2017)05/11/2017
Court upheld district court’s grant of a motion to compel arbitration and dismiss, finding the agreement to arbitrate was not illusory and declining to address the claim that the district court was required to stay the action instead of dismiss.
-
Sunvalley Solar, Inc. v. CEEG (Shanghai) Solar Science & Technology Co., No. 15-56802 (9th Cir. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court of appeals affirmed grant of defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court held that distribution contract between the parties that was silent as to arbitration should not be read in isolation, but rather the arbitration clauses contained in specific purchase orders governing each transaction in dispute applied.
-
Clarke v. Upwork Global, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-00560-AJN (S.D.N.Y. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court denied plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction to enjoin defendant’s arbitration claims. Court found that the plaintiffs failed to persuade the court of their likelihood of success on the merits and that the balance of the equities weighed in their favor since they eschewed almost six months of opportunities to object to the arbitration.
-
Metter v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 3:16-CV-06652 (N.D. Cal. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court denied defendant’s motion for reconsideration of the order denying its motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s putative class claims. Court denied defendant’s argument that the court should have ordered trial on the material issue of consent pursuant to the FAA because defendant did not raise the issue of material fact in connection with its motion to compel arbitration.
-
Ouadani v. Dynamex Operations East, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-12306-PBS (D. Mass. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration of plaintiff’s putative class action claims for violations of the Fair Labor standards Act and state wage laws under the FAA. Court held the non-signatory was not bound to arbitrate on traditional agency principals or equitable estoppel, and the agreement did not create third-party beneficiary status.
-
Fairhope Piggly Wiggly-Inc. v. PS 2 LED, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-00031-KD-N (S.D. Ala. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration at the current time and ordered a trial on the issue, finding there was a genuine dispute of material fact over the existence of an agreement to arbitration pursuant to the FAA.
-
Coudert Brothers LLP v. Rupert X. LI, No. 7:16-CV-08237-KMK (S.D.N.Y. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court denied order compelling arbitration, finding the defendant had not been properly served. Court determined that where a party to an arbitration agreement is not within the US service is not governed by the FAA but FRCP Rule 4. In the instant case, the plaintiff failed to properly effect service under any of the possibilities under FRCP Rule 4.
-
Century III Mall PA LLC v. Sears Roebuck and Co., No. 2:16-CV-01839-LPL (W.D. Pa. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, finding plaintiff’s vacatur motion failed to set forth a claim as a matter of law. Court held that plaintiff’s assertions – that the award departed from the terms of the Lease, exceeded the arbitrator’s authority, and was irrational error requiring vacatur – failed as they do meet the applicable standard of review under the FAA and FRCP Rule 12(b)(6).
-
Dillon v. BMO Harris Bank, N.A., No. 16-1362 (4th Cir. May 10, 2017)05/10/2017
Court affirmed district court’s order denying motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the FAA. Court held the choice of law provision providing for application of the “laws of the Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians,” but forbidding an arbitrator from applying any state or federal law, functioned as a prospective waiver of federal statutory rights and, thus, was unenforceable as a violation of public policy. Court denied a request to sever the choice of law provision, finding the provision went to the essence of the arbitration agreement.
-
Energy Operations, Inc. v. United Government Security Officers of America International Union, No. 16-1219 (8th Cir. May 9, 2017)05/09/2017
Court of appeal affirmed decision to uphold arbitrator’s award, holding (i) that reinstatement of terminated officer would not violate public policy, as would warrant overturning arbitration award ordering reinstatement; and (ii) the arbitrator did not exceed his authority under the collective bargaining agreement. Court found that any violation of federal regulations could be avoided by employing officer in a different role, and that the arbitrator had analyzed this question in the context of the agreement’s provisions, and therefore acted within his authority.
-
James River Insurance Co. v. Atlantic Building Systems, LLC, No. 1:16-CV-01981-MSK-NYW (D. Colo. May 9, 2017)05/09/2017
Magistrate judge recommended motion to dismiss be granted and the case stayed pending completion of arbitration pursuant to the FAA. Court found arbitration provision was enforceable and the provision was mandatory not permissive, and therefore the arbitrator must resolve the claim alleging invalidity of the policies as a whole based on fraudulent misrepresentation or inducement.
-
Rivera v. Saul Chevrolet, Inc., No. 5:16-CV-05966-LHK (N.D. Cal. May 9, 2017)05/09/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration on an individual basis. Court found the arbitration agreement was unenforceable because it interfered with plaintiff’s right to “engage in…concerted activities for the purpose of…mutual aid or protection” under the National Labor Relations Act and acted as an express class action waiver. Court also held the pendency of an action waiver issue before the United States Supreme Court offered no basis to grant the motion.
-
Ambulatory Services of Puerto Rico, LLC v. Sankar Nephrology Group, LLC., No. 4:17-CV-230-A (N.D. Tex. May 9, 2017)05/09/2017
Court denied plaintiff’s motion to stay arbitration and granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and stayed the action pursuant to resolution of the issue of arbitrability. Court held parties clearly and unmistakably delegated authority to the arbitrator to determine issues of arbitrability.
-
Cross Link, Inc. DBA Westar Marine Services v. Salt River Construction Corporation, No. 16-CV-05412-JSW (W.D. Ark. May 8, 2017)
05/08/2017Court granted petition to confirm arbitration award, finding that the arbitrator did not exceed his powers by issuing an award in favor of petitioner, since respondent had failed to provide evidence to support its assertion that arbitrator lacked jurisdiction and because respondent had not previously moved to stay the arbitration.
-
Sullivan v. Endeavor Air, Inc., No. 16-1653 (8th Cir. May 8, 2017)05/08/2017
Court of appeals affirmed the lower court’s denial of defendant-appellee’s petition to vacate an arbitration award. Court held that, contrary to defendant-appellee’s claims, (i) the arbitration award did not violate due process or any other form of public policy; (ii) the arbitrator did not exceed his jurisdiction; and (iii) the arbitration award did not fail to draw its essence from the contract.
-
Habliston v. FINRA Dispute Resolution, Inc., No. 1:15-CV-02225-ABJ (D.D.C. May 8, 2017)05/08/2017
Court denied motion for reconsideration of order dismissing case with prejudice and motion for leave to file a substituted amended complaint, holding that the court had no jurisdiction over the proposed amended complaint. Court found that suits brought under the FAA required an independent jurisdictional basis, as the statute was not jurisdictional, and that claims were barred by the doctrine of arbitral immunity, as defendant was immune from suit.
-
Wilson v. 5 Choices, LLC, No. 2:16-CV-10659-RHC-MKM (E.D. Mich. May 8, 2017)05/08/2017
Court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss without prejudice, pending the outcome of arbitration or litigation, finding the arbitration and forum selection provisions were enforceable. Court concluded plaintiffs’ Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations claims fell under the scope of the arbitration agreement.
-
Smallish v. Meijer, Inc., No. 2:12-CV-11457-VAR-MKM (E.D. Mich. May 8, 2017)05/08/2017
Court confirmed the arbitral award and dismissed motion to vacate. Court held that plaintiff failed to establish facts to indicate partiality of the arbitrator and, in any event, had waived the claim by waiting to raise the alleged conflict of interest until after the award was rendered in circumstances where the plaintiff was previously aware of its existence.
-
Knight v. Idea Buyer, LLC., No. 2:16-CV-01175-GCS-TPK (S.D. Ohio May 8, 2017)05/08/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss and compel arbitration and denied the motion to stay as moot. Court found review of the validity of the plaintiffs’ claims and enforceability of the agreements were issues for arbitration and plaintiffs should proceed in individual arbitral proceedings since the arbitration provision did not address class arbitration. Under the FAA, the claim should be dismissed and not stayed because all plaintiffs’ claims were arbitrable.
-
The Sanwan Trust v. Lindsay, No. 1:16-CV-12469-RWZ (D. Mass. May 5, 2017)05/05/2017
Court denied petition to vacate arbitral award and granted petition to confirm. Court held that plaintiff’s grounds for vacatur on manifest disregard of the law and public policy were not an appropriate basis for vacatur.
-
McCauley v. America’s Pizza Co., No. 2:16-CV-253 (S.D. Ohio May 5, 2017)05/05/2017
Court granted defendant’s motion to consolidate for discovery purposes but denied motion to consolidate in all other respects, reasoning that the cases were at different stages and the plaintiffs were seeking to represent different distinguished classes partially by issue of an arbitration agreement.
-
Lasseigne v. Sterling Jewelers, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-16925-LMA-MBN (E.D. La. May 5, 2017)05/05/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration pursuant, holding there was a valid agreement between the parties and the dispute fell within the scope of the agreement. Court did not find plaintiff’s claim that she did not electronically sign the arbitration provision to be credible, concluding it was more likely than not that she signed the agreement. Court stayed and administratively closed the action pending arbitration.
-
Janus Distributors LLC v. Roberts, No. 1:16-CV-2130 (D. Colo. May 5, 2017)05/05/2017
Court granted motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, finding the FAA does not provide a federal cause of action to ground the petition to vacate the arbitral award. Court concluded that there was not another independent basis for federal jurisdiction under the Securities and Exchange Act based on a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority claim, finding that plaintiff’s petition did not require the resolution of a federal issue.
-
Garcia v. Midland Funding, No. 1:15-6119-RBK-KMW (D.N.J. May 5, 2017)05/05/2017
Court denied motion to compel individual arbitration under the FAA. Court found that while there was a valid arbitration agreement, defendant did not have the broad right to compel arbitration for any dispute or claim under the assigned agreement. Court granted and denied in part defendant’s motion to seal, allowing for public access to a redacted version of the underlying agreement.
-
Kambala Wa Kambala v. Checchi and Company Consulting, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-00451-APM (D.D.C. May 4, 2017)05/04/2017
Court granted motion to enjoin arbitration, finding that plaintiff waived its right to arbitrate by filing simultaneous court and arbitration actions.
-
Olazabal v. Service Keepers Maintenance, Inc., No. 1:17-CV-20660-JAL (S.D. Fla. May 4, 2017)05/04/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, holding that a valid written agreement to arbitrate existed and that the statutory claims for unpaid overtime wages were arbitrable. Court found that plaintiff had signed a binding arbitration agreement, which contained a collective action waiver barring judicial recourse for these claims.
-
NV Petrus SA v. LPG Trading Corp., No. 14-CV-03138-NGG-PK (E.D.N.Y. May 4, 2017)05/04/2017
Court denied motion to dismiss on grounds of forum non conveniens in favor of an LCIA arbitration. Court found defendants had waived their right to arbitrate by waiting nearly three years to request arbitration and actively participating in litigation. Court also held that defendants waived their argument that English law governed the action where defendants impliedly consented to state law governing the dispute by consistently relying on state law in their memoranda of law.
-
Nadeau v. Equity Residential Properties Management Corp., No. 7:16-CV-07986-VB (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 2017)05/04/2017
Court denied motion to compel arbitration and stay the action pending arbitration. Court found defendant materially breached the arbitration agreement by refusing to arbitrate before the AAA and thus waived its right to subsequently compel arbitration.
-
Bogar v. Ameriprise Financial Services., No. 1:16-CV-7199-GHW (S.D.N.Y. May 4, 2017)05/04/2017
Court denied petition to vacate arbitral award under the FAA and granted motion to confirm the award. Court rejected allegations that the arbitrator exceeded his authority, declining to consider the circumstances where a violation of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority could provide a basis for vacatur and dismissing as meritless the allegations of the insufficiency of evidence at arbitration.
-
T&S Brass and Bronze Works, Inc. v. Slanina, No. 6:16-CV-03687-MGL (D.S.C. May 4, 2017)05/04/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding an individual was entitled to enforce an arbitration agreement that she signed as an agent of the party to the agreement.
-
Doctor’s Associates v. Repins, No. 3:17-CV-00323-JCH (D. Conn. May 4, 2017)05/04/2017
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, finding that the parties delegated questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator.