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.
-
D.A. Nolt, Inc. v. Local Union No. 30, No. 15-3697 (3rd Cir. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court affirmed district court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion to vacate arbitration award. The arbitrator acted within the scope of his authority in interpreting the agreement and the plaintiff’s argument that the arbitrator disregarded the law or violated public policy was rejected.
-
Langere v. Verizon Wireless Servs., LLC, No. CV 15-00191 DDP (AJWx) (C.D. Cal. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration since the arbitration agreement at issue was sufficiently broad to cover plaintiff’s claims. Court also found that the arbitration agreement was minimally procedurally unconscionable and not accompanied by any substantive unconscionability, and therefore is enforceable.
-
Ybarra et al. v. Texas Migrant Council, No. 5:15-CV-00136 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and adopted magistrate judge’s findings, which rejected plaintiff’s arguments that the defendant failed to identify which arbitration agreement it was attempting to enforce, and that the arbitration agreement was illusory and unenforceable. The magistrate judge also found that the fifth circuit had interpreted the FAA to authorize dismissal of the case when all of the issues raised are submitted to arbitration.
-
D.A. Nolt Inc. v. Local Union No. 30 United Union of Roofers, No. 15-3697 (3d Cir. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of appellees on appellant’s challenge to an arbitration award in favor of appellees. Court held that district court correctly determined that the arbitrator acted within the scope of his authority in construing the contract and that appellee had failed to show that the arbitration award manifestly disregarded the law or violated public policy.
-
McGroarty v. U.S. Rare Earths, No. 1:16-CV-02687-GHW (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court confirmed arbitration award under the FAA as defendant did not oppose the petition to confirm or otherwise appear in the action and there is no indication of a basis for vacating or modifying the award. Court applied same standard as applicable to unopposed summary judgment motions.
-
Flynn v. FCA US, d/b/a Chrysler Group and Harmon International Industries, No. 3:15-CV-00855-MJR-DGW (S.D. Ill. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court granted in part and denied in part motion to compel arbitration. Court granted the motion in relation to certain claims covered under an arbitration agreement between Chrysler and two of the plaintiffs and stayed such claims pursuant to § 3 of the FAA until arbitration is complete. Court held Chrysler did not waive its right to arbitrate by participating in the judicial process since, as soon as it discovered the arbitration agreement, it moved to compel arbitration.
-
Montoya v. Comcast Corporation, No. 2:15-CV-02573-TLN-DB (E.D. Cal. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, denied motion to dismiss as moot, and stayed action pending arbitration. Court held that, even though plaintiffs were non-signatories to the arbitration agreement, plaintiffs were bound by it since they knowingly exploited defendant’s services and therefore accepted its contract terms, including the arbitration agreement. The arbitration agreement was not procedurally unconscionable since it lacked a “surprise” element, nor was it substantively unconscionable under California law since it did not lead to “overly harsh” or “one-sided” results. The dispute was also within the scope of arbitration provision.
-
Lift Equipment Certification Co., Inc. v. Lawrence Leasing Corp., No. 2:15-CV-01987-JAD-GWF (D. Nev. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court denied motion to modify or partially vacate arbitration award and granted in part and denied in part defendant’s counter motion to confirm and award attorney fees. Court held that plaintiff failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the arbitrator “manifestly disregarded the law” or that the award was “arbitrary and capricious.” Court declined to award defendant its legal fees since plaintiff’s claims were “far from frivolous – particularly given the arbitration award’s vagueness.”
-
Imbruce v. American Arbitration Association, No. 1:15-CV-07508-NRB (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Court granted AAA’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ amended complaint based on AAA Rule R-52(D) and the doctrine of arbitral immunity. Court held that AAA’s failure to collect a counterclaim fee prior to the issuance of the arbitrator’s damages award on that counterclaim is “sufficiently associated with the adjudicative phase of the arbitration to justify immunity.” Court rejected plaintiffs’ “thinly veiled attempt to evade arbitral immunity” under the functus officio doctrine by basing their case on the alleged post-award collection of a fee by the AAA rather than the AAA’s failure to collect such fees prior to the issuance of the award. Court also dismissed plaintiffs’ claims for a judgment declaring the AAA’s fee collection void, holding that this was an impermissible attempt to challenge the arbitral award that can only be brought in an action to vacate.
-
Estate of Johnson Clark v. William Horwich, No. 12-17577 (9th Cir. Sept. 23, 2016)09/23/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s dismissal of a motion to compel arbitration since the FAA does not itself confer jurisdiction on federal district courts over actions to compel arbitration, nor create a federal cause of action giving rise to federal question jurisdiction under 28 USC § 1331.
-
Gilman v. Walters, No. 3:12-CV-00114-SEB-MPB (S.D. Ind. Sept. 22, 2016)
09/22/2016Court granted motion to recognize AAA arbitration award, denying a cross-motion to vacate that award. The court rejected arguments that the arbitrator had exceeded his scope of authority, finding that the requested review would amount to revisiting the arbitrator’s arbitrability determinations that were squarely within his purview.
-
Service Employees International Union National Industry Pension Fund v. Scientific & Commercial Systems Corp., No. 1:13-CV-01705-JEB (D.D.C. Sept. 22, 2016)09/22/2016
Court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, holding that defendant forfeited its right to arbitrate by not requesting arbitration and did not make any overtures to plaintiff to jointly agree to arbitrate.
-
Doss v Nordstrom Inc., No. 3:15-CV-904 (M.D. Tenn. Sept. 22, 2016)09/22/2016
Court accepted magistrate judge’s report and recommendation that defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted and that the parties be ordered to arbitrate their dispute. Court held that the arbitration agreement has not been rendered unenforceable due to allegations of breach of contract, which was a matter for the arbitrator to determine, and that the agreement was not an unconscionable contract of adhesion.
-
Coopertiva Agraria Industria Naranjillo Ltd. v. Transmar Commodity Group. Ltd., No. 1:16-CV-03356-LLS (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, 2016)09/22/2016
Court granted petition to vacate arbitration award. Parties entered into six agreements that referenced a standard contract containing an arbitration agreement, which was not furnished or brought to the attention of the petitioner before or at the execution of the six agreements. Court held that incorporation of the arbitration clauses was never effectively accomplished because petitioner did not know about an implied agreement to arbitrate, nor was it on notice to search for the terms of an arbitration agreement or warned that an arbitration agreement existed.
-
Zambrano v. Strategic Delivery Solutions, No. 1:15-CV-08410-ER (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, 2016)09/22/2016
Court granted in part and denied in part motion to dismiss complaint and compel arbitration, and stayed action pending arbitration. Court held that plaintiffs are bound to arbitrate their claims since they agreed to arbitration, their claims are within the scope of the arbitration agreement, there is no indication that their claims are nonarbitrable, and the arbitration agreement does not prevent plaintiffs from effectively vindicating their rights. Even if the plaintiffs’ claims qualified as exempt from the FAA, court held they would be subject to mandatory arbitration under New York law. Whether the class waiver provision is enforceable, is for the arbitrator to decide.
-
Choice Hotels International, Inc. v. SNV Hospitality, No. 8:15-CV-02385-GJH (D. Md. Sept. 22, 2016)09/22/2016
Court granted request for judgment by default based on arbitration award. Court held that plaintiff is entitled to confirmation of its award under the FAA, finding no reason in the record to question the validity of the parties’ agreement or the conduct of the arbitrator. Further, court found that the parties agreed an award may be entered against a party which fails to appear if it is properly notified of the proceedings, and that judgment on the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction.
-
United States Soccer Federation v. United States National Soccer Team Players Association, No. 15-3402 (7th Cir. Sept. 22, 2016)09/22/2016
Circuit court reversed district court’s judgment confirming arbitration award and remanded case with instructions to vacate award and enter judgment in favor of plaintiff. Reviewing the arbitration award de novo, circuit court held that arbitrator exceeded his authority by interpreting the parties’ agreement beyond its clear and unambiguous terms, erroneously assuming the terms were silent on the issue in dispute.
-
North Atlantic Distribution, Inc. v. International Longshoremen Association, No. 1:16-CV-00067-M-PAS (D.R.I. Sept. 22, 2016)09/22/2016
Court affirmed arbitration award, holding that the parties agreed issues of arbitrability were for the arbitrator to decide, and the arbitrator’s decision that the issue in dispute was arbitrable could not be overturned. In light of the deference given to arbitration decisions, the court refused to review the merits of the underlying dispute.
-
Lee v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 1:15-cv-11756 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 21, 2016)09/21/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed case pending outcome of arbitration. Court held that delegation clause in arbitration agreement was clear and unmistakable in delegating the question of arbitrability to an arbitrator and was not unconscionable.
-
Lee v. Uber Techs., Inc., No. 1:15-CV-11756 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 21, 2016)09/21/2016
Court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and dismiss action. Court held that questions of enforceability of the parties’ agreement, the collective arbitration prohibition, and unconscionability, should be decided by the arbitrator. Court also held that the proper procedure was to stay the proceedings rather than dismiss them outright.
-
Federal National Mortgage Association, a/k/a Fannie Mae v. Teri Prowant and Tamara Mitchell-Johnson, No. 1:14-CV-03799-AT (N.D. Ga. Sept. 21, 2016)09/21/2016
Court granted motion for summary judgment, holding that by filing the court case and “substantially invoking the litigation machinery,” plaintiff waived its right to arbitration and materially breached the parties’ dispute resolution policy. Court further granted defendants’ request to rescind the dispute resolution policy based on plaintiff’s material breach and denied as moot defendant’s motion for summary judgment seeking a declaration and injunction based on the now extinguished dispute resolution policy.
-
Genz-Ryan Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Sheet Metal Workers’ Local 10 Pension Fund, No. 0:16-CV-00280-DWF (D. Minn. Sept. 19, 2016)09/19/2016
Court denied employer’s motion to dismiss a request for judicial review of an arbitration award. Court held that arbitration proceeding was complete for purposes of review of the decision and construed the “Petition to Vacate” as a complaint sufficient to begin a civil action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3 and the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act.
-
Melody Bynum v. Maplebear dba Instacart, No. 1:15-CV-06263-JBW-CLP (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 19, 2016)09/19/2016
Court denied motion for certification for appeal under 28 USC § 1292(b) of court order compelling arbitration and staying litigation. Court held that the question whether claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act are arbitrable is not “a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion.”
-
Choice Hotels International, Inc. v. Harikrishna, No. 8:15-CV-03528-GJH (D. Md. Sept. 19, 2016)09/19/2016
Court granted request for judgment by default based on arbitration award. Court held that plaintiff is entitled to confirmation of its award under the FAA since the parties agreed that judgment shall be entered upon any award made under their agreement and there is no ground for vacating, modifying, or correcting the award under §§ 10 or 11 of the FAA. Moreover, per the parties’ agreement, an award may be entered against a party, which fails to appear, if it is properly notified of the proceedings.
-
Air-Con, Inc. v. Daikin Applied Latin America LLC, No. 15-2683 (GAG) (D.P.R., Sep. 19, 2016)09/19/2016
Court granted motion to remand case to state court. Court denied request to exercise federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 9 USC § 205, holding that from the notice of removal it is not clear that there is a written arbitration agreement as required by the New York Convention..
-
Sturtevant v. Xerox Commercial Solutions, No. 2:16-CV-01158-RSM (W.D. Wash. Sept. 19, 2016)09/19/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss claims since, by electronically signing various company policies including defendant’s dispute resolution plan, plaintiff agreed to resolving disputes by arbitration.
-
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Krieg, No. 2:15-CV-014846 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2016)09/16/2016
Court granted motion for default judgment and confirmed arbitration award. Court held that, in the absence of any opposition by plaintiff (as plaintiff had failed to respond to defendant’s petition to confirm the award and also failed to appear at the hearing scheduled for arguments on defendant’s motion for default judgment), affirmation of the arbitration award was appropriate.
-
Ray Strong v. Robert D. Geringer, No. 2:15-CV-00837-TC (D. Utah, Sept. 15, 2016)09/15/2016
Court granted in part and denied in part motion to stay proceedings and compel arbitration. Court held that arbitration agreement in question applies to all disputes arising out of the parties’ contract, but it could not apply to creditors and investors who had not signed the arbitration agreement. Court further held that plaintiff has not waived his right to arbitrate by initially opposing arbitration and then changing course.
-
Joshua Silfee v. Automated Data Processing and ERG Staffing Service, No. 3:15-CV-00023 (M.D. Pa., Sept. 15, 2016)09/15/2016
Court denied motion to compel arbitration and stay litigation since the complaint and its supporting documents are unclear regarding the agreement to arbitrate and the validity of the arbitration agreement is in dispute. Court held that it will entertain a renewed motion to compel arbitration once “at the very least ‘discovery on the question of arbitrability’” has taken place.
-
Strong v. Geringer, No. 2:15-CV-00837-TC (D. Utah Sept. 15, 2016)09/15/2016
Court granted in part and denied in part plaintiff’s motion to stay the present action and compel arbitration. Court held that, plaintiff, as liquidation trustee, stands in the shoes of a debtor, and is therefore bound by the parties’ arbitration agreement and plaintiff did not waive the right to pursue arbitration. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to pursue arbitration against those parties who agreed to arbitrate.
-
Salameno v. Gogo Inc., 1:16-CV-00487-JBW-ST (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 15, 2016)09/15/2016
Court denied motion for reconsideration of court’s prior order compelling arbitration. Court held that, as the motion for reconsideration neither presented new evidence nor provided any equitable reason that would cause the court to alter its initial conclusion, the motion for reconsideration must be denied.
-
Dean v. Ad Astra Recovery Services, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-03817-RGK-JEM (C.D. Cal. Sep. 14, 2016)
09/14/2016Court granted an unopposed motion by one of the defendants to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings with respect to that defendant, finding that a valid arbitration agreement covered the scope of the parties’ dispute. Court declined to stay proceedings with respect to the remaining defendants in the exercise of its discretion.
-
Washington Frontier League Baseball LLC v. Zimmerman, No. 1:14-CV-01862-TWP-DML (S.D. Ind. Sept. 14, 2016)09/14/2016
Court denied motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3) (dismissal for improper venue). Court held that the claims asserted against these defendants are subject to the parties’ dispute resolution clause, not the mandatory binding arbitration clause, and therefore may be asserted in court.
-
Brittania-U Nigeria Ltd. v. Chevron U.S.A Inc.., No. 4:16-CV-01457 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 14, 2016)09/14/2016
Court denied motion to amend the court’s prior dismissal-without-prejudice order to one staying the case pending arbitration. Court held that a stay is not required because the weight of authority supports dismissal of the case when all of the issues raised in the district court must be submitted to arbitration, which the court determined was the case.
-
Fletcher v. Honeywell Int’l, Inc., No. 3:16-CV-00302-WHR (S.D. Ohio. Sept. 14, 2016)09/14/2016
Court denied motion to compel arbitration. Court held that defendant did not consent to arbitrate disputes with plaintiffs, who were retirees and no longer employees, and therefore the current dispute did not fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement. Court also rejected argument that the plaintiffs were entitled to rely on the arbitration agreement as third party beneficiaries.
-
Silipigno v. Raymond James Fin. Servs., No. 1:16-CV-00170-MAD (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 14, 2016)09/14/2016
Court denied motion to confirm arbitration award. Court held that, as no proof of notice had been submitted on plaintiff’s motion, which is a requirement under the FAA to retain jurisdiction, the Court had not obtained jurisdiction over defendant.
-
Miller & Son Paving, Inc. v. Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Phila. and Vicinity, No. 2:15-CV-04869-GAM (E.D. Pa. Sept. 14, 2016)09/14/2016
Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, except for attorneys’ fees, thereby affirming the arbitrator’s opinion and award. Court held that plaintiff’s withdrawal liability under ERISA was calculated by the arbitrator under a reasonable interpretation of the pension benefit plan and was neither arbitrary nor capricious.
-
Patterson v. Raymours Furniture Co., Inc., No. 15-2820-CV (2d Cir. Sept. 14, 2016)09/14/2016
Circuit Court affirmed district court’s grant of defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court held that defendant’s prohibition of class or collective adjudication of work-related claims does not illegally restrict its employees’ substantive rights under the National Labor Relations Act and the Norris-La Guardia Act, and is therefore enforceable under the FAA.
-
Hermés of Paris Inc. v. Matthew Swain, No. 1:16-CV-06255-CM (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 13, 2016)09/13/2016
Court granted petition to compel arbitration, since – absent any evidence to the contrary – the parties’ arbitration agreement was valid. Court held it had personal jurisdiction over respondent since a party who agrees to arbitrate in a particular jurisdiction consents to both personal jurisdiction and venue of the courts within that jurisdiction.
-
Mascio v. Mullica Twp. Sch. Dist., 1:16-CV-00206-RBK-JS (D. N.J. Sept. 13, 2016)09/13/2016
District court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that defendants violated her rights to procedural due process under the U.S. Constitution, as plaintiff received notice and a hearing before an independent arbitrator.
-
Marshall v. Wells Fargo Advisors LLC, No. 16-10497 (11th Cir. Sept. 13, 2016)09/13/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s granting of defendant’s motion to strike certain parties from the complaint because they were not represented by an attorney and its motion to dismiss as to another plaintiff because he lacked standing to sue, as he was not party to the arbitration and therefore is not a party to the award.
-
Favors v. Triangle Servs., Inc., No. 15-CV-03817-PKC-LB (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 13, 2016)09/13/2016
District court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed the court action pending plaintiff’s participation in the alternative grievance procedure under the parties’ collective bargaining agreement. Court held that, pursuant to the parties’ agreement, all individual employee claims of discrimination must be arbitrated.
-
Golden Gate Nat’l Senior Care, LLC v. Fleshman, No. 3:15-CV-00891-GNS (W.D. Ky. Sept. 13, 2016)09/13/2016
District court granted motion to compel arbitration and stay court action. Court held that defendant neither lacked the capacity to execute the arbitration agreement nor were the terms of the agreement procedurally or substantively unconscionable.
-
Danielle Chatman v. Jimmy Gray Chevrolet and John Does 1-10 Defendants, No. 3:16-CV-00008-GHD-SAA (N.D. Miss., Sept. 12, 2016)09/12/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed case pending arbitration., Court held that parties entered into a valid arbitration agreement that delegated gateway rulings on threshold arbitrability issues to the arbitrator under 9 USC § 3, including whether plaintiff may have waived its right to arbitrate. Court further enjoined the parties from attempting to judicially prosecute any claims against each other until such time as the arbitrability issue was decided.
-
Croom v. Elkhart Products Corp., 3:15-CV-00288-RLM-MGG (N.D. Ind. Sept. 12, 2016)09/12/2016
District court granted motion to dismiss defendant’s counterclaim, which sought a declaration that plaintiff’s claims were subject to binding arbitration under the company’s collective bargaining agreement. Court held that the provisions of that agreement do not explicitly or clearly and unmistakably mandate that federal employment-related discrimination claims must be resolved in arbitration and therefore do not preclude plaintiff from filing statutory claims of discrimination in court.
-
Johnson v. Sally Beauty Supply, LLC, 2:16-CV-02531-JLL-JAD (D. N.J. Sept. 12, 2016)09/12/2016
District court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. Court held that the issue raised by plaintiff – whether the arbitration agreement is unconscionable – falls within the scope of the arbitration agreement’s delegation clause, or agreement to arbitrate arbitrability issues, and therefore should be addressed by the arbitrator.
-
Board of Trustees of the Ohio Carpenters’ Pension Fund v. Ramunno Builders, Inc., No. 4:15-CV-00424-BYP (N.D. Ohio Sept. 12, 2016)09/12/2016
District Court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Court held that, as defendants failed to timely request arbitration, as required by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980, they waived any defenses to the withdrawal liability assessment under ERISA or any right to assert a counterclaim concerning the assessment process.
-
Golden Gate Nat’l Senior Care, LLC v. Jones, No. 0:16-CV-00049-HRW (E.D. Ky. Sept. 12, 2016)09/12/2016
District Court granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel arbitration and enjoin defendant from pursing claims in any alternative forum. Court held that the arbitration agreement involved interstate commerce as the nursing home accepted Medicare, that there was nothing suggesting it was one-sided, oppressive, unfairly surprising or the result of unfair bargaining, and that it was not void as against public policy, as wrongful death and loss of consortium claims are arbitrable.
-
Leviege v. Vodafone US Inc., No 1:16-CV-00374-LMB-IDD (E.D. Va. Sept. 11, 2016)09/11/2016
Court denied motion for reconsideration of order dismissing action for lack of jurisdiction because plaintiff had signed a binding arbitration agreement with defendant. Court found that the minor wording adjustments to a policy supplied after the arbitration agreement was signed did not “muddy the crystal clear language” of the arbitration agreement between the parties.
-
Snyder v. Cach, LLC, No. 16-00097-ACK-KJM (D. Haw. Sept. 9, 2016)09/09/2016
Court granted in part and denied in part motion to stay discovery pending another motion to compel arbitration. Court found that defendant will incur only minimal time and expense responding to the five discovery requests plaintiff maintains are necessary to oppose the motion to compel arbitration. Court found that, beyond these five requests, the remaining discovery did not have any arguable impact on the motion to compel arbitration, and that the parties should not be required to endure the expense of that discovery at this time.