• Home
  • About Dave
    • What is the Process?
    • My Professional Experience
  • Practice Areas
    • Arbitration
    • Mediation
    • Corporate Disputes
    • Franchise & Distribution Disputes
    • Financing & Lender Liability Disputes
    • Electronic Discovery Mediation & Special Master
    • Title IX / Title VII Investigations
  • News & Blog
  • Contact

Contact me (203) 641-0991

David ReifDavid Reif
David ReifDavid Reif
  • Home
  • About Dave
    • What is the Process?
    • My Professional Experience
  • Practice Areas
    • Arbitration
    • Mediation
    • Corporate Disputes
    • Franchise & Distribution Disputes
    • Financing & Lender Liability Disputes
    • Electronic Discovery Mediation & Special Master
    • Title IX / Title VII Investigations
  • News & Blog
  • Contact

ADR Highlights: December 28, 2023

Home NewsADR Highlights: December 28, 2023

ADR Highlights: December 28, 2023

News

As usual during the weeks around Christmas and New Years Day, the courts have been fairly quiet.  But, here are a couple cases of interest and an important journal article.

Delegation of Gateway Issues through the Adoption of Rules; London Maritime Arbitrators Association; “Arising from”

It is now black letter law, except, perhaps, in the context of consumer cases, that the invocation of the rules of the AAA or JAMS delegates the resolution of threshold issues, such as arbitrability, to the arbitrator.  America Chung Nam, LLC v. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 227709 (C.D. Cal. December 19, 2023), holds that, where the parties invoke the rules of the London Maritime Arbitrators Association, those issues remain with the court. The LMAA’s rules provide that “jurisdiction of the tribunal shall extend to determining all disputes arising under or in connection with the transaction the subject of the reference.”  Judge Blumenfeld contrasts those rules with the AAA provisions which provide that “the arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his or her own jurisdiction, including any objections with respect to the . . .validity of the arbitration agreement.”  The court opines that “the LMAA Terms merely discuss the scope of disputes subject to arbitration (without specifying who will decide arbitrability challenges).  Because the selected rules do not reflect a clear and unmistakable delegation [see Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79 (2002)], the Court must decide whether an arbitration agreement exists.”  Judge Blumenfeld, then, opines that the subject arbitration provision, which “covers disputes ‘arising or in connection with’ the parties’ agreement,” includes all disagreements “in which it underlying facts ‘touch matters’ covered by the agreement.” (Internal citation omitted).  Accordingly, under the provisions of the parties’ Charter Agreement, he compels arbitration of a dispute raising tort claims, including fraudulent inducement and negligence.

Delegation of Issues Related to Non-Signatory

Nicholas Services, LLC v. No. Bombardier, Inc., 2023 U.S. Dist. 229124 (N.D. Miss. December 26, 2023), addresses another delegation question.  Judge Mills holds that, despite the subject agreement’s broad arbitration clause, threshold issues are not delegated to the arbitral panel where those questions relate to non-signatories.  Questions such as equitable estoppel, the court holds, are issues of contract formation, which only the court may decide. Thus, he considers whether a non-signatory to the parties’ warranty and purchase agreements may be compelled to arbitrate its warranty claims. After discussing assignee rights and equitable estoppel, he compels arbitration.

Arbitrating Attorney-Client Disputes

Matthew Corbin has an excellent article in a recent edition of “The Brief,” a publication of the ABA’s Tort Trial and Insurance Practice Section, Finding a Safe Harbor for Arbitration Clauses in Attorney-Client Engagement Agreements, 52 The Brief No. 4, 53 (Summer 2023). In a heavily footnoted review, Corbin takes a deep dive into the ethical opinions of the ABA and State Bars and discusses judicially imposed requirements for an enforceable agreement.  As counsel try to avoid litigating malpractice claims and fee disputes before potentially unsympathetic juries, the case is an important read for the General Counsel of larger firms and for any attorney drafting an engagement letter.  Unfortunately, the article is behind a paywall on the ABA website, but great material, like this, is another reason to join the ABA Section.

Best wishes for 2024.  Thanks for taking the time to read “Highlights” over the past year.  I’m honored by your willingness to do so and hope that I’ve justified your investment. Here’s to a safe, peaceful, and healthy 2024.

David A. Reif, FCIArb
ReifADR
Dreif@Reifadr.com
ReifADR.com

Share
0

About David Reif

After four decades of litigation and dispute resolution over the full range of disputes, Dave retired from active trial practice and is concentrating on the provision of arbitration and mediation services. He brings broad experience in resolving - as litigator, a mediator, and arbitrator - all types of disputes. Learn more about Dave!

You also might be interested in

ADR Highlights: September 16, 2020

Sep 16, 2020

Law clerks on the Court of Appeals must have been[...]

ADR Highlights: August 25, 2021

Aug 25, 2021

Not a whole lot going on today, with only a[...]

ADR Highlights: June 14, 2021

Jun 14, 2021

There are some particularly interesting decisions today, so today’s “Highlights”[...]

Leave a Reply

Your email is safe with us.
Cancel Reply

Dedicated to quick and effective resolution

Click here to schedule your case with Dave...
SCHEDULE NOW

Learn about Dave

professional experience, training, articles, awards, etc...
VIEW DAVE'S RESUME

PRACTICE AREAS

  • Arbitration
  • Mediation
  • Corporate Disputes
  • Franchise & Distribution Disputes
  • Financing & Lender Liability Disputes
  • Electronic Discovery Mediation & Special Master
  • Title IX / Title VII Investigations

Recent News & Updates

  • ADR Highlights: March 14, 2025
  • ADR Highlights: March 11, 2025
  • ADR Highlights: February 11, 2025
  • ADR Highlights: February 7, 2025
  • ADR Highlights: February 4, 2025
  • ADR Highlights: January 14, 2025
  • ADR Highlights: December 31, 2024
  • ADR Highlights: December 19, 2024
  • ADR Highlights: December 5, 2024
  • ADR Highlights: December 2, 2024

Contact Us

We're currently offline. Send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Send Message
CONTACT DAVE
Logo

Contact Dave Today

CONTACT DAVE

  • David Reif - Arbitrator & Mediator
  • Reif ADR
  • 470 James Street
  • Suite 7
  • New Haven, Connecticut 06513
  • (203) 641-0991
  • dreif@reifadr.com
  • https://reifadr.com/
Loading

© 2025 · David A Reif · All Rights Reserved

Prev Next