Griffin v. Asbury Automotive St. Louis, LLC

Filing 17

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion to compel arbitration [# 10 ] is granted, and the parties are compelled to arbitrate their underlying dispute in accordance with the rules of the AAA as set ou t in the arbitration agreement. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to stay [# 11 -2] is granted, this case is stayed pending completion of arbitration, and the alternative motion to dismiss [# 11 -1] is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant shall file status reports regarding the progress of the arbitration every 90 days and a notice to the Court within ten days of the conclusion of arbitration. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 04/17/2015. (CBL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
LESLIE GRIFFIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
ASBURY AUTOMOTIVE ST.
LOUIS, L.L.C.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4: 14 CV 1921 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER OF STAY
In this removed case, plaintiff brings state law claims for fraud, negligence,
and declaratory and statutory relief arising out of her purchase of a car from
defendant. In connection with her purchase, plaintiff signed an arbitration
agreement with defendant. Defendant seeks to enforce this agreement and asks me
to either dismiss or stay this case pending arbitration. The agreement calls for
arbitration “in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association”
and further provides that “nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted as
limiting or precluding the arbitrator(s) from awarding monetary damages or any
other relief provided for by law.” Although plaintiff disputes the enforceability of
the arbitration agreement, she agrees to arbitration of the dispute under the
agreement “provided Defendant agrees to waive any provisions of the Agreement
to arbitrate that are inconsistent with the Consumer Due Process Protocol of

[AAA].” Although plaintiff claims that “provisions” of the arbitration agreement
conflict with this Protocol, the only one she actually mentions is that “each party
shall be responsible for its own attorney, expert, and other fees, and shall not be
entitled to an award of fees.” Plaintiff claims this provision is inconsistent with
Principle 14 of the Protocol, which states that “the arbitrator should be empowered
to grant whatever relief would be available in court under law or in equity.”
However, given that arbitration is to be conducted “in accordance with the rules”
of the AAA and the agreement expressly provides that nothing in it prevents “the
arbitrator(s) from awarding monetary damages or any other relief provided for by
law,” the agreement does not appear to conflict with Principle 14 (or any of the
other Principles) of the AAA Protocol. Defendant filed no objection to plaintiff’s
request to arbitrate in accordance with the Consumer Due Process Protocol of the
AAA, nor did it object to plaintiff’s request that this case be stayed, rather than
dismissed, during the pendency of arbitration. Because both parties agree to
arbitration of their dispute in accordance with the rules of the AAA and neither
party opposes a stay of this case during the pendency of arbitration, I will grant
defendant’s motions as follows:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant’s motion to compel arbitration
[#10] is granted, and the parties are compelled to arbitrate their underlying dispute
in accordance with the rules of the AAA as set out in the arbitration agreement.
2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to stay [#11-2] is granted,
this case is stayed pending completion of arbitration, and the alternative motion to
dismiss [#11-1] is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant shall file status reports
regarding the progress of the arbitration every 90 days and a notice to the Court
within ten days of the conclusion of arbitration.

_________________________________
CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 17th day of April, 2015.

3