______________________________________________________________________
February 21, 2003
Cases:
1. Arbitration: Once a court finds that the parties have
agreed to
arbitrate, it is for the arbitration panel, not a court, to
determine
the enforceability of the underlying contracts.
2. Arbitration: "Reasonable impression of partiality"
is the correct
standard in determining arbitrator bias.
3. Mediation: Mere dissatisfaction with a settlement will
not support a
negligence claim.
_____________________________________________________________________
Case Summaries:
Arbitration: Once a court finds that the parties have agreed
to
arbitrate, it is for the arbitration panel, not a court, to
determine the
enforceability of the underlying contracts. John B. Goodman
Limited
Partnership v. THF Construction, Inc., 2003 WL 329000 (11th
Cir. Fla.). (MG).
John B. Goodman Limited Partnership sued THF Construction,
Inc., alleging
violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act
(RICO), fraud and negligent hiring related to two construction
project
contracts. THF, seeking to compel arbitration, unsuccessfully
moved for
summary judgment in the district court, where Goodman argued
that the
arbitration clauses contained in the contracts were unenforceable
due to
the
unenforceability of the underlying contracts. THF appealed and
the United
States Court of Appeals (11th Cir.), treating the arbitration
clauses and
the construction contracts separately, held that under both
Florida law
and the Federal Arbitration Act, once a district court finds
that the
parties have agreed to arbitrate, it is for the arbitration
panel, not the
district court, to determine the enforceability of the underlying
contracts.
Available at:
http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/feb2003/02-13435.opn.html
_____________________________________________________________________
Arbitration: Arbitrator bias, and “reasonable impression
of partiality”
standard. Waverlee Homes v. McMichael, Alabama S. Ct. 2003
(Alabama
02/14/03). (DH).
Plaintiff-respondent Chris McMichael (McMichael) sued Waverlee
Homes, Inc.
(Waverlee) for fraud and other claims related to McMichael's
purchase of a
mobile manufactured home. After arbitration, but prior to the
entering of
the award, Waverlee motioned to have the award set aside, claiming
the
arbitrator was biased. On appeal the Supreme Court found that
the evidence
produced by Waverlee, prior cases where arbitrator served as
co-counsel
with McMichael’s attorney as well as similar decisions
by the arbitrator,
compelling enough to send the case back to circuit court. The
Supreme
Court held that the appropriate standard of review for arbitrator
bias is
the “reasonable impression of partiality.”
Available online at:
http://www.wallacejordan.com/decisions/Opinions2003/1010966.htm
_____________________________________________________________________
Mediation: Mere dissatisfaction with a settlement will not
support a
negligence claim. University Nursing Associates, PLLC v.
Phillips, 2003
WL 328034, Miss.,2003. (KA).
John and Jay Diebold (the Diebolds) filed a malpractice negligence
claim
against their attorney, Steve Torvik (Torvik) who had represented
the
Diebolds in mediation. At mediation, Torvik agreed to the mediator's
appraisal of corporate stock at $64,000. The Diebolds settled
their claim
based on this amount. An expert subsequently valued the stock
at
$500,000. The Diebolds were unsuccessful to set aside the settlement
and
sued Torvik for damages. The Court dismissed the Diebolds claim
in
holding that the Diebolds knew what they were settling on, what
they would
receive, and what they would forego. The Court expressly relied
on the
principle that mere dissatisfaction with a settlement will not
support a
negligence claim.
Available at www.Westlaw.com; site 20030wl 282430.
_____________________________________________________________________
Editor-in-Chief: Demetri Papachristopoulos
Contributing Writers: Mike Greene (MG), Dave Hannon (DH), Kyle
Abraham (KA).
