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.
-
Boyd v. Springleaf Fin. Serv., Inc., No. 1:16-CV-00814 (D.N.M. Sep. 9, 2016)09/09/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, reasoning that the parties were bound by the arbitration provision of their employment contract. Court noted the pro-arbitration policy enacted via the FAA and rejected plaintiff’s arguments that the arbitration agreement was unsupported by consideration, was illusory, was otherwise invalid because she did not know all its terms at the time of signature, or because the parties failed to have a meeting of the minds based on a combination of the three.
-
Dunn v. Dunn, No. 2:14-CV-601-MHT (M.D. Ala. Sept. 9, 2016)09/09/2016
Court granted final approval of the parties’ joint settlement agreement, which contained an arbitration provision, and their request to enter a consent decree. Court determined that the stipulations negotiated and entered into by the parties were sufficient to alleviate its concerns that any arbitration of disputes arising during the pendency of the consent decree would be binding, mandatory and enforceable.
-
Patrick v. Rai Serv. Co., No. 3:16-CV-00852-HGD (N.D. Ala. Sept. 9, 2016)09/09/2016
District Court granted defendant’s motion to compel arbitration and denied plaintiff’s motion to dismiss, instead staying the case pending resolution of the arbitration. Court held that there was an implied or constructive contract between plaintiff and defendant to submit employment-related matters to arbitration, that plaintiff had received a copy of the arbitration agreement and was aware of its contents, and that the arbitration agreement covered plaintiff’s claims in this action related to his employment.
-
Yox v. Providence Health Plan, Nos. 14-35127, 14-35144 (9th Cir. Sept. 9, 2016)09/09/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff, rejecting defendant’s argument that plaintiff had waived right to sue by agreeing to arbitration. Court found that the parties’ agreement to have medical insurance claim denials reviewed by an Independent Review Organization did not constitute an agreement to arbitrate but was rather more similar to the practice of obtaining another medical opinion
-
Patrick v. Rai Serv. Co., No. 3:16-CV-00852-HGD (N.D. Ala. Sept. 9, 2016)09/09/2016
Court granted motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that it was possible to imply the existence of an arbitration agreement in the circumstances under the doctrine of quasi-contract, and thus the court did not need to rule on the credibility of plaintiff’s testimony that the electronic signature on the contract was not his.
-
Cortés-Ramos v. Sony Corp. of Am., No. 15-1786 (1st Cir. Sept. 9, 2016)09/09/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s grant of petition compelling arbitration, finding that appellant’s appeal concerned issues relating to the merits of its claims and did not impact the district court’s decision that such matters should be decided in arbitration.
-
Gillick v. Brown, No. 4:16-CV-00122-RLW (E.D. Mo. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Court granted motion for judgment on the pleadings in action seeking court appointing of an impartial umpire, finding that the applicable agreement provided for court appointment in the event the parties could not agree on an impartial umpire.
-
Wiregrass Metal Trades Council AFL–CIO v. Shaw Envtl. & Infrastructure, Inc., No. 15-11662 (11th Cir. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Circuit court reversed and remanded district court’s decision to set aside arbitral award. Court, in supporting the broad federal policy supporting enforcement of arbitration awards, held that when it is not apparent from the arbitrator’s stated reasoning (or lack thereof) whether he or she permissibly interpreted a collective bargaining agreement or impermissibly modified it, and one can plausibly read the award either way, the court must resolve the ambiguity by finding that the award is an interpretation of the contract and enforce it.
-
Chassen v. Fidelity Nat’l Fin., Inc., No. 15-3789 (3d Cir. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Circuit court remanded case to district court with instructions to compel individual arbitration of plaintiffs’ arbitrable claims. Court held that futility can excuse the delayed invocation of the right to compel arbitration and, because any attempt to compel individual arbitration in plaintiffs’ case prior to the Supreme Court’s decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion would have been futile, remand to compel arbitration was therefore in order.
-
Tr. of Empire State Carpenters Annuity, Apprenticeship, Labor-Mgmt., Corp., Pension, and Welfare Funds v. All Cnty. Paving Corp., No. 2:15-CV-05688-ADS-ARL (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Court granted petition to confirm and enforce arbitration award on report and recommendation of magistrate judge dated July 27. Court accepted magistrate’s holding that, as the respondent had been properly served with notice of the arbitration (although not having participated therein), the arbitration award provided for more than “a barely colorable justification for the outcome reached.”.
-
SBRMCOA, LLC v. Bayside Resort, Inc., No. 3:06-CV-00042-CVG-RM (D.V.I. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
On a writ of mandamus issued by the third circuit, the district court found that none of the provisions of the parties’ water supply agreement that plaintiff contended were beyond the authority of the Board of Directors rendered that agreement as a whole, including its arbitration clause, ultra vires, and therefore nothing prevents an arbitrator from addressing the parties’ dispute.
-
Smalls v. Five Star Premier Residence of Yonkers, No. 1:13-CV-07757-LGS (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Court granted petition to confirm arbitration award and denied cross-motion to vacate, finding that plaintiff had not established any grounds for vacatur under § 10 of the FAA.
-
Wiregrass Metal Trades Council AFL-CIO v. Shaw Envtl. & Infrastructure, Inc., No. 15-11662 (11th Cir. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Circuit court overruled district court’s set-aside of arbitration award, holding that where it is not apparent from an arbitrator’s stated reasoning whether she permissibly interpreted a contract or impermissibly modified it, a court should presume that the award is an interpretation of the contract and enforce it.
-
Chassen v. Fid. Nat’l Fin., Inc., No. 15-3789 (3d Cir. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s grant of motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendant’s delay in moving to compel bilateral arbitration did not effect a waiver since, under controlling law at the time (since overruled), the arbitration clause’s limits on class arbitration would have been considered unconscionable and thus motion would have been futile.
-
Sbrmcoa, LLC v. Bayside Resort, Inc., No. 3:06-CV-00042-CVG-RM (D.V.I. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
On writ of mandamus issued by the circuit court, district court reaffirmed previous grant of motion to compel arbitration, finding that presence of ultra vires clause in the contract did not render the arbitration clause ultra vires.
-
Norwin School Bus Drivers Ass’n v. First Student, Inc., No. 2:16-CV-00666-RCM (W.D. Pa. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Court denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment as to the enforcement of an arbitral award and remanded the matter to the arbitrator for resolution of an ambiguity as to whether federal regulations that appear to impose prerequisites to reinstatement of employment are implicit in the award.
-
Ryan v. Delbert Servs. Corp., No. 5:15-CV-05044-JFL (E.D. Pa. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that the arbitration clause’s choice of tribal law impermissibly renounced the application of federal law to federal law claims and was effectively a “choice of no law clause”; and delegation clause entrusting determination of validity of arbitration clause to the arbitrator was unenforceable since it would impermissibly insulate an unenforceable arbitration clause from attack.
-
Ga.-Pac. Gypsum, LLC v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 117, No. 3:16-CV-05255-BHS (W.D. Wash. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Court affirmed arbitral award, finding that arbitrator’s decisions on admissibility of certain evidence and interpretation of governing agreement were not subject to judicial review.
-
Grynberg v. BP P.L.C., No. 1:08-CV-00301-JDB (D.D.C. Sept. 8, 2016)09/08/2016
Court denied motion to vacate court’s prior dismissal of RICO claims in favor of arbitration under Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60, finding that plaintiff failed to establish that the arbitrator was biased against him at the time it ruled on those claims.
-
John of Arc, Inc. v. The Johnny Rockets Group, Inc., No. 8:16-CV-01325-CJC-DFM (C.D. Cal. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration with respect to one defendant and stayed proceedings with respect to all defendants. Court held that the claims fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement, and that all of the claims were so closely related that efficiency supported a stay of proceedings against all defendants.
-
Royal Alliance Assocs., Inc. v. Mooney, No. 2:16-CV-02379-PA-AFM (C.D. Cal. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismissed plaintiff’s claims. Court held that defendants could invoke FINRA’s arbitration rules, which require arbitration where requested by a customer, and that defendants, as a FINRA account holders, were customers of plaintiff.
-
Trs. of Empire State Carpenters Annuity, Apprenticeship, Labor-Mgmt. Cooperation, Pension and Welfare Funds v. All Cty. Paving Corp., No. 2:15-CV-05688-ADS-ARL (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court granted motion for default judgment on plaintiff’s unopposed petition to confirm and enforce an arbitration award, adopting magistrate judge’s report and recommendations.
-
R&G Student Hous., LLC v. Phoenix Sustainable Grp., LLC, No. 6:16-CV-01363-GAP-DAB (M.D. Fla. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court denied emergency motion to enforce the parties’ negotiated arbitration provision, finding that, where parties disagree over proper forum for arbitration, cost of responding to arbitration demand in contested forum is not an irreparable injury warranting a preliminary injunction enjoining the contested proceedings.
-
Noye v. Johnson, No. 1:15-CV-02382-YK (M.D. Pa. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court denied motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings, both as to signatory to arbitration agreement and non-signatory co-defendant. Court held that plaintiff had produced sufficient evidence indicating that he did not intend to be bound the arbitration agreement to warrant discovery on the question of arbitrability and further briefing under a summary judgment standard, and that non-signatory co-defendant consequently could not rely on arbitration agreement derivatively.
-
Ekryss v. Ignite Restaurant Grp., Inc., 6:15-CV-06742-CJS (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the complaint, finding that the arbitration provision contained in employment guidelines was not illusory since, although employment guidelines could be changed by employer at will, arbitration provision was distinct from the remainder of the guidelines.
-
Slatten v. Jim Glover Chevrolet Lawton, LLC, No. 5:15-CV-01180-D (W.D. Okla. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court denied motion to reconsider prior denial of motion to compel arbitration. Court held that defendant’s argument that the arbitration agreement’s fee-splitting provision was contrary to the AAA arbitration rules and unenforceable – and that the agreement may thus be enforced without that provision – should have been raised in prior briefing.
-
Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Ledbetter, No. 1:16-CV-00070-DAS (N.D. Miss. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court denied motion to compel arbitration, finding that defendant’ voluntarily withdrawal of her state court claims did not render motion moot, since they could be reasserted; and defendant was entitled to evidentiary hearing on her contention that her purported signature was inauthentic.
-
Diversicare Leasing Corp. v. Helmick, No. 0:16-CV-00048-HRW (E.D. Ky. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and enjoin parallel state court proceedings and dismissed with prejudice. In rejecting challenge to arbitration agreement, court held that state precedent creating exacting requirements for power of attorney documents purporting to grant an agent authority to enter into an arbitration agreement on behalf of a principle is pre-empted by the FAA and in any event not applicable where the power of attorney expressly gives authority to execute consents, waivers, and releases of liability. Court also held that, although FAA does not authorize federal courts to stay state court proceedings pending arbitration, an injunction to this effect may be issued under an exception to the Anti-Injunction Act.
-
Golden Living Ctr.-Vanceburg v. Reeder, No. 0:16-CV-00009-HRW (E.D. Ky. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and enjoin parallel state court proceedings and denied motion to dismiss. Rejecting the defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to join a party, court found that non-diverse individual defendants to a state action are not indispensable parties in a parallel federal court action to compel arbitration. In rejecting challenge to arbitration agreement, court held that state precedent creating exacting requirements for power of attorney documents purporting to grant an agent authority to enter into an arbitration agreement on behalf of a principle is pre-empted by the FAA and in any event not controlling in cases of guardianship. In rejecting request to abstain from exercising jurisdiction, court found that applicability of FAA weighs against surrender of federal jurisdiction. Finally, court held that, although FAA does not authorize federal courts to stay state court proceedings pending arbitration, an injunction to this effect may be issued under an exception to the Anti-Injunction Act.
-
Patterson v. Raymours Furniture Co., No. 15-2820-CV (2d Cir. Sept. 7, 2016)09/07/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s grant of motion to compel arbitration. While circuit panel “might well be persuaded” that class action waiver in an agreement to arbitrate employment and compensation-related claims is unenforceable in light of collective action protections under federal and state labor law, Second Circuit precedent – not yet overruled by en banc panel or Supreme Court review – compelled rejecting a challenge on this basis.
-
Harrod v. Signet Jewelers Ltd., No. 6:15-CV-06111-SOH (W.D. Ark. Sept. 6, 2016)09/06/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and stayed proceedings, adopting magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Magistrate judge had found that plaintiff’s challenges to the validity of the arbitration agreement were factually unsupported in light of “recently acquired documentation” submitted by defendant with its reply brief.
-
Sangkharat v. Dr. Reynolds & Assoc., P.C., No. 2:16-CV-10514-DPH-DRG (E.D. Mich. Sept. 6, 2016)09/06/2016
Court granted motion to dismiss and compel arbitration, finding that, where an employment agreement contains a provision requiring compliance with non-discrimination statutes, claims arising under those statutes fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement.
-
Cunico v. Custom Alloy Corp., No. 14-56544 (9th Cir. Sept. 6, 2016)09/06/2016
Circuit court reversed district court’s order granting motion to compel arbitration and remanded for further proceedings since district court had not made necessary factual findings as to the parties’ communications, decided the law applicable to contract formation, or stated as a matter of law what constituted the offer, acceptance, or terms of the contract.
-
AlixPartners v. Charles Brewington, No. 16-1027 (6th Cir. Sept. 2, 2016)09/02/2016
Court affirmed district court’s summary judgment order that arbitration clause in plaintiff’s employment agreement did not authorize plaintiff to pursue class-wide arbitration. The gateway issue, whether the parties’ arbitration agreement permits class-wide arbitration, is reserved for judicial determination since the parties did not “clearly and unmistakably” agree otherwise.
-
GGNSC Stanford, LLC v. Johnson, No. 5:16-CV-00012-KKC (E.D. Ky. Sept. 2, 2016)09/02/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration, holding that the arbitration agreement (1) was subject to the FAA since it related to the provision of long-term healthcare and therefore involved interstate commerce; (2) was not procedurally unconscionable since it was contained in a separate document titled in bold and written in capital letters; and (3) it had not been shown to be substantively unconscionable since defendant failed to substantiate its claims that arbitration would be prohibitively expensive and unacceptably truncate discovery.
-
Int’l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, Local Union 272, AFL-CIO v. FirstEnergy Generation Corp., 2:16-CV-00360-TFM (W.D. Pa. Sept. 2, 2016)09/02/2016
Court denied motion to vacate arbitration award, finding that arbitrator’s award represented a “serious and fair-minded attempt” to interpret and apply the language of the collective bargaining agreement at issue.
-
Delgado v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC., 1:13-CV-04427-NGG-ST (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2016)09/02/2016
Court denied motion compel arbitration and stay action. While challenges to a contract as a whole, rather than the arbitration clause specifically, are generally for the arbitrator to decide, challenges to the existence of the contract in the first place (including fraud-in-the-factum allegations) are generally for the court. Court held that plaintiffs sufficiently substantiated their allegations of fraud-in-the-factum and are entitled to proceed to trial on this point.
-
HCR Manorcare, Inc. v. Youngblood, No. 3:16-CV-00032-GMG (N.D. W.Va. Sept. 2, 2016)09/02/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration since in wrongful death action arbitration agreement signed with the decedent is enforceable against administrator representing decedent’s estate.
-
Rite Aid of NY, Inc. v. 1999Seiu United Healthcare Workers E., No. 16-cv-1821 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2016)09/01/2016
Court denied petition to vacate labor arbitration award since the challenge was premised entirely on the notion that the arbitrator had erroneously interpreted the agreement at issue. Court held that, even in circumstances where the arbitrator has committed serious error, if the arbitrator is arguably construing or applying the contract within the scope of his authority the decision should be upheld.
-
NCR Corporation v. Goh, No. 2:16-CV-00127-MJP (W.D. Wash. Sept. 1, 2016)09/01/2016
Court granted motion for summary judgment that arbitrator was authorized to decide the dispute. Court held that the plaintiff had waived its right to challenge the arbitrator’s authority to resolve the dispute and it would be unreasonable to allow the plaintiff to reverse course after voluntarily participating.
-
Samaan v. General Dynamics Land Sys., Inc., No. 15-2277 (6th Cir. Aug. 31, 2016)08/31/2016
Court affirmed district court’s denial of the motion to vacate the arbitration award pursuant to the FAA. Court held that the arbitrator was not required to rule on the motion for summary disposition within thirty days of motion hearing, concluded that the arbitrator’s alleged actions during the arbitration proceedings were insufficient for vacatur, and found that the FAA does not allow vacatur on the basis of fulfillment of moral or ethical obligations.
-
Fitzgerald v. The Bondfactor Co., LLC, No. 1:15-CV-06796-CM (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2016)08/31/2016
Court granted plaintiff’s petition to confirm arbitral award but denied plea for pre-judgment interest at New York’s statutory rate of 9% per annum on the award. Court held that neither party objected to confirmation of the award nor argued a basis for vacating or modifying it, so the award must be confirmed. Court rejected plaintiff’s claim for pre-judgment interest because in an action for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, pre-judgment interest may not be awarded in addition to liquidated damages, which is what plaintiff received.
-
Amat v. Rey Pizza Corp., No. 1:15-CV-24687-JEM (S.D. Fla. Aug. 31, 2016)08/31/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the case, finding that the arbitration agreement is neither substantively or procedurally unconscionable and that contested contractual limitation on recovery would be severable if arbitrator finds it to be unlawful.
-
Samann v. General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc., No. 15-2277 (6th Cir. Aug. 31, 2016)08/31/2016
Circuit court affirms district court’s order denying a motion to vacate an arbitration award under § 10 of the FAA. In rejecting the appellant’s arguments in favor of vacating the award, court held that (a) under the terms of the arbitration agreement the arbitrator was not required to rule on a motion for summary disposition within 30 days of the hearing; (b) the arbitrator’s actions were not a sufficient basis for vacatur under the FAA; and (c) the FAA does not allow for vacatur based on the fulfillment of moral and ethical obligations.
-
Altela Inc. v. Arizona Science and Technology Enterprises LLC, No. 2:16-CV-01762-DGC (D. Ariz. Aug. 31, 2016)08/31/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration and dismiss action but denied motion to compel negotiation or mediation. Court held that under the FAA a party’s post-ratification breach of a contract cannot negate a valid arbitration agreement unless the breach pertains to the arbitration provisions itself, and therefore the defendant’s breach of contract does not preclude it from enforcing the arbitration agreement. Court further held that the defendant waived the right to mediate and that the alter ego of the signatory-defendant can enforce the terms of an arbitration agreement to the same extent that the signatory can.
-
Hose v. Washington Inventory Servs., Inc., 3:14- CV-02869-WQH-AGS (S.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2016)08/30/2016
Court granted motion to compel arbitration. Finding that the electronic signatures were an act attributable to the plaintiffs, court concluded the arbitration agreement was valid. Inventory associate workers were not exempt from the FAA as transportation employees engaged in interstate commerce.
-
Meditech Inc. v. 360Training.com, Inc., No. 1:14-CV-00023-TC (D. Utah Aug. 30)08/30/2016
Following the court’s September 2014 order compelling arbitration, the defendant refused to pay the deposit on the arbitrator’s fees and the arbitrator cancelled the arbitration. Court now orders the defendant to pay the arbitrator’s deposit and the plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees to enforce the court order and the arbitration agreement; and re-imposes the stay pending completion of the arbitration.
-
D’Cruz v. NCl (Bahamas) Ltd., No. 15-11766 (11th Cir. Aug. 29, 2016)08/29/2016
Circuit court affirmed district court’s order compelling arbitration under the New York Convention. Following Alberts v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. No. 15-14775 (11th Cir. Aug. 23, 2016), court held that because the plaintiff’s contract envisioned performance abroad the arbitration clause is enforceable under the New York Convention, § 202 of the FAA.
-
Parm v. National Bank of California, N.A., No. 15-12509 (11th Cir. Aug. 29, 2016)08/29/2016
Circuit court affirms district court’s decision not to compel arbitration since the arbitration agreement was unconscionable and required the parties to arbitrate in an unavailable forum. Court held that the arbitration agreement’s forum selection clause mandates the use of an illusory and unavailable arbitral forum, and because this term was integral to the parties’ agreement to arbitrate, the court cannot provide a substitute arbitrator or compel arbitration under §5 of the FAA.
-
Moss v. First Premier Bank, No. 15-2513-CV (2d Cir. Aug. 29, 2016)08/29/2016
Circuit court affirms district court’s decision that it could not appoint a substitute arbitrator since the parties’ arbitration agreement contemplated arbitration only before the National Arbitration Forum which was no longer accepting consumer arbitrations. Court held that, where the designated arbitration forum is unavailable and no other option has been agreed by the parties, it must decline under §5 of the FAA to appoint substitute arbitrators or compel arbitration in another forum. Court did however recognize that there is a circuit split on this issue.