Whetstone v. Blue World Pools Inc

Filing 10

ORDER granting 1 Motion to Withdraw Reference, withdrawing the reference of adversary proceeding number 11-80012 and granting 2 Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Case. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 07/21/2011.(bshr, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ORANGEBURG DIVISION
In re:

)
)
Angela Whetstone,
)
)
Debtor,
)
________________________________ )
)
Angela Whetstone,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Blue World Pools, Inc.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_________________________________ )

Chapter 13
Case No. 10-08068-dd
Adv. Pro. No.: 11-80012-dd

C/A No.: 5:11-cv-1560-JFA

ORDER

This matter is before the court on Blue World Pools, Inc.’s motion to withdraw the
reference of adversary proceeding No. 11-80012, which is currently pending in the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Carolina. Plaintiff Angela
Whetstone had until July 11, 2011, to respond to Blue World Pools’ motion, but has
elected not to do so. Blue World Pools files its motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(d),
which provides:
The district court may withdraw, in whole or in part, any case or
proceeding referred under this section, on its own motion or on timely
motion of any party, for cause shown. The district court shall, on timely
motion of a party, so withdraw a proceeding if the court determines that
resolution of the proceeding requires consideration of both title 11 and
other laws of the United States regulating organizations or activities
affecting interstate commerce.

Because Ms. Whetstone’s complaint requires the court to engage in substantial and
material consideration of both Title 11 and other laws of the United States regulating
organizations or activities affecting interstate commerce—in particular the Truth in
Lending Act and the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act—Blue World Pools
contends that withdrawal of this reference is mandatory. Blue World Pools further
believes that the court should withdraw the reference on a permissive basis because it has
shown sufficient cause to warrant such action. It argues that the claims asserted by Ms.
Whetstone in her adversary proceeding are non-core to the bankruptcy proceeding and
are motivated by forum-shopping, as the claims she asserts in the adversary proceeding
are identical to the claims asserted in four other cases brought before this court of which
Ms. Whetstone was previously a party. After considering Blue World Pools’ motion, as
well as the fact that Ms. Whetstone elected not to oppose that motion, the court grants the
motion to withdraw the reference of adversary proceeding number 11-80012.
Having taken the case from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of
South Carolina, the court also addresses Blue World Pools’ motion to stay the case and
compel arbitration. Ms. Whetstone did oppose this motion, and the parties’ briefs echo
the arguments made before this court in Lawrence v. Blue World Pools Inc. (8:11-cv1099-JFA), Glasser v. Blue World Pools Inc. (3:11-cv-1086-JFA), Braden v. Blue World
Pools Inc. (5:11-cv-1091-JFA), Tant v. Blue World Pools Inc. (9:11-cv-1102-JFA). After
considering the parties’ briefs, the court maintains its belief that the law requires the court
to uphold the arbitration provision contained in the parties’ contract. Therefore, the court

2

grants Blue World Pools’ motion to stay this case and compel arbitration for the reasons
stated in its order issued in those cases.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

July 21, 2011
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

3