When Seeking to Compel Arbitration, a Motion to Dismiss Is Sometimes the First Step

Mintz - Arbitration, Mediation, ADR Viewpoints

The Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. §§ 1, et seq., provides the usual means of enforcing an arbitration agreement by compelling a party to arbitrate rather than litigate. Thus, the FAA enables an aggrieved party to seek “an order directing that such arbitration proceed in a manner provided for in such agreement.” 9 U.S.C. § 4.

However, when (i) a judicial proceeding concerning the claims in question is already pending, and (ii) the applicable arbitration agreement provides that the place of arbitration is outside of the jurisdiction of the federal district court hearing the pending suit, a motion to that court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(3) to dismiss the pending suit for improper venue is the correct means of attacking the judicial proceeding, rather than a motion under the FAA (a) to stay it or (b) to compel arbitration. See, e.g., Faulkenberg v. CB Tax Franchise Sys., LP, 637 F.3d 801, 808 (7th Cir. 2011).

A further motion to compel in a court with jurisdiction in the designated place of arbitration may still be necessary.  And jurisdiction issues might then abound if it is.

[View source.]

Written by:

Mintz - Arbitration, Mediation, ADR Viewpoints

Mintz - Arbitration, Mediation, ADR Viewpoints on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.