|
When an appellate court affirms denial of a motion to compel arbitration, the moving party may not bring a second motion to compel without presenting newly discovered evidence, according to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
In Vest v. Duncan-Williams, Inc., No. M2005-00466-COA-R3-CV, 2006 WL 2252750 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 3, 2006), Duncan-Williams moved to compel arbitration, arguing it was a third-party beneficiary of a contract requiring arbitration. The trial court denied the motion. On appeal, the Court affirmed the denial because there was no evidence that the parties entered into the contract “directly and primarily” for the benefit of Duncan-Williams.
After remand, Duncan-Williams brought a second motion to compel arbitration, attempting to correct the evidentiary deficiencies that thwarted its initial motion. The trial court denied the second motion, mainly because Duncan-Williams did not submit any newly discovered evidence but instead submitted evidence that was “clearly available” when the initial motion was filed.
On appeal, the dispositive issue was “whether a party may seek to compel arbitration after its initial motion to compel has been denied, and that denial affirmed on appeal, without a showing that the new motion is based on newly discovered evidence.” The Court concluded that the answer is no.
The Court distinguished motions to compel arbitration from other pre-trial motions on the ground that denial of a motion to compel is immediately appealable, unlike other interlocutory orders. The Court also observed that Duncan-Williams’ second motion to compel and subsequent appeal were inconsistent with the arbitration’s goal of “expedit[ing] the resolution of disputes between parties.”
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|