Even when parties have agreed to arbitrate disputes, questions sometimes arise over whether an issue actually is subject to arbitration. Also, quite common are questions over who decides the issue of arbitrability – the court or the arbitrator?
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Blanton v Domino’s Pizza Franchising LLC provided clarity on this question. In this case, certain employees brought a putative class action against their employer, claiming that the employer's franchise agreements violated federal antitrust and state laws. The district court judge granted the employer's motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the employees’ lawsuit. The employees appealed.
In affirming the trial court’s dismissal in favor of arbitration, the appellate court observed that while the courts typically look to state law to interpret arbitration agreements (e.g., to examine questions of contract formation) the U.S. Supreme Court, applies federal law, requiring “clear and unmistakable” evidence that the parties agreed to have an arbitrator decide the issue of arbitrability. This requirement effectively eliminates any presumption in favor of arbitration when it comes to questions of “arbitrability.”
In Blanton, the arbitration agreement incorporated the rules of the American Arbitration Association (AAA). Those rules plainly empower the arbitrator to decide questions of arbitrability. The appellate court recognized that other trial courts in the Sixth Circuit, and the Sixth Circuit itself, have previously relied upon the incorporation of AAA rules to find a clear and unmistakable agreement to arbitrate questions of “arbitrability.” Also persuasive to the court was the fact that 11 of the 12 circuits, having considered the issue, had concluded that the incorporation of the AAA or similar rules provides clear and unmistakable evidence that an agreement to arbitrate “arbitrability.”
Blanton stands for the rather unremarkable rule that incorporation of AAA rules into an arbitration agreement means that an arbitrator will decide all question over which disputes are subject to arbitration. But the lesson to be taken from the Blanton decision is that not all arbitration clauses or agreements are the same. Planning requires thoughtful understanding of what your arbitration agreement says – and means.
- Partner
Matthew J. Boettcher is a partner in the firm’s Bloomfield Hills office and a member of Plunkett Cooney’s Commercial Litigation Practice Group. He concentrates his practice in the area of commercial litigation with ...
Comments
Add a comment
Subscribe
RSSTopics
- Tax Law
- Commercial Liability
- Business Risk Management
- Personal Tax Controversy
- Property tax
- Contracts
- Business Torts
- Commercial Real Estate
- Commercial Loans
- Business Tax Controversy
- Commercial Leasing
- Civil Litigation
- COVID-19
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Banking Law
- Bankruptcy
- Lending
- Standing
- Real Estate
- Real Estate Mortgages
- Facilitation
- Coronavirus
- Appellate Law
- Mortgage Foreclosure
- Trade Secrets
- Litigation Discovery
- Corporate Formation
- Risk Management
- Fraud Activity
- Shareholder Liability
- Cryptocurrency
- Regulatory Law
- Cyber Attack
- Insurance
- Damages Recovery
- privacy
- Cybersecurity
- Class Action
- Product Liability
- Pensions
- Statute of Limitations
- Biometric Data
- e-Discovery
- Noncompete Agreements
- e-Commerce
- Internet Law
- Consumer Protection
- Residential Liability
- Venue
- Zoning and Planning
- Clawback
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Receiverships
- Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
- Fair Credit Reporting Act
- Garnishments
- Unfair Competition
- Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
Recent Updates
- Offer in Compromise Programs Provide Taxpayers with Options to Settle Federal, State Tax Debt
- IRS and State Payment Plan Options - Part 1: The Installment Agreement
- What can Homeowners do When Property Taxes are too High?
- Understanding the Michigan Property Tax Appeals Process for Commercial, Industrial Properties
- 6 New Year’s 'Business Resolutions' Worth Considering
- What You Can do Now to Prepare for an IRS Employee Retention Credit Audit
- Calling Blanket Purchase Order a “Requirement Contract” in Supplier of Goods Dispute Doesn’t Make it so
- Understanding the 3 Options for IRS Notice Compliance
- Intervention Protects Your Rights, Interests in Litigation Filed by Others
- Michigan Supreme Court Rules Usury Savings Clauses no Longer Protect Lenders Charging Facially Usurious Interest Rates