Affirming a trial court order denying a motion to compel arbitration of a dispute over termite treatment, a North Carolina appellate court held that no arbitration agreement existed between the parties because one party fraudulently induced the other party to sign the agreement.

In Robertson v. Terminix Co. of East Carolina, No. COA07-233, 2008 WL 434579 (N.C. Ct. App. Feb. 19, 2008), James Robertson contracted with Terminix for termite treatment in 1989. After he passed away, his widow, Patricia Robertson, continued making payments under the contract and receiving benefits. In 1999, Terminix employees approached Mrs. Robertson telling her to sign paperwork authorizing new treatment. They told her that there was no need for her to read the paperwork and that she needed to sign the papers immediately because they were in a hurry.

Mrs. Robertson later discovered that her house's roof had extensive termite damage and sued Terminix. Terminix moved to compel arbitration pursuant to the contract Mrs. Robertson had signed. The trial court denied the motion, finding there was no valid agreement to arbitrate. Terminix appealed.

Affirming the trial court, the Court held that because the underlying contract was void, no agreement to arbitrate existed between the parties. Specifically, the Court concluded the trial court had sufficient evidence to support its findings based on Mrs. Robertson's sworn affidavit asserting Teminix's agents misrepresented the contract she signed.

Under the Supreme Court decision in Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440 (2006), an arbitrator ordinarily determines the validity of the contract as a whole. From the facts presented in this case, it is unclear whether fraudulent inducement claim related specifically to the arbitration agreement or to the contract as whole.