|
Tort claims are subject to a broadly worded arbitration clause if they cannot be maintained without reference to the underlying contract, according to a Texas federal court.
In Sharifi v. AAMCO Transmissions, Inc., No. 3:07-CV-0718-D, 2007 WL 1944371, (N.D. Tex. June 28, 2007), franchisee Sharifi sued franchisor AAMCO for a number of alleged torts, including fraud and emotional distress. AAMCO moved to compel arbitration pursuant to a broadly worded arbitration clause in the parties' franchise agreement. In opposing the motion, Sharifi argued that the claims were torts that did not arise out of or relate to the agreement.
The Court found that all the torts alleged by Sharifi fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement. Accordingly, the Court granted AAMCO's motion to compel. In granting the motion, the Court first observed that the arbitration clause was "broad," indicating that the parties "intend[ed] the clause to reach all aspects of [their] relationship." Moreover, the Court found that all of Sharifi's tort claims were subject to the arbitration clause because they could not be maintained without reference to the underlying contract.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|