|
While citing the well-settled policy that "arbitration is a favored means of dispute resolution," the Florida District Court of Appeal relied on the broad language of an arbitration agreement in reversing the trial court and ordering arbitration of fraud and RICO claims against a property developer.
In Waterhouse Constr. Group, Inc. v. 5891 SW 64th Street, LLC, No. 3D06-1452, 2007 WL 403721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2007), 5891 SW 64th Street ("Street") signed a joint venture and a construction contract with Waterhouse for the development of property owned by Street. Both contracts contained broadly worded arbitration agreements.
In ordering arbitration, the Court noted three items of particular importance: (1) that the expansive language of the arbitration agreements ("any [and] all disputes") clearly established the parties' intent to arbitrate the fraud and RICO claims; (2) that resolution of the RICO claims required reference to the contracts containing the arbitration agreements; and (3) that there was a "substantial nexus" between Street's claims and the "very essence" of the two contracts.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|