Holtzman, Judith v. Credit One Bank, N.A.
ORDER granting 10 motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the case. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 3/6/18. (jat)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
CREDIT ONE BANK, N.A.,
Plaintiff Judith Holtzman is suing defendant Credit One Bank, N.A. under the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act for allegedly using an automatic telephone dialing system
to call her without her consent. Credit One has filed a motion under 9 U.S.C. §§ 3 and 4 to
compel arbitration and dismiss the case. Dkt. 10. In response, Holtzman concedes that her
claim is subject to an arbitration agreement, but she asks the court to stay rather than dismiss
Holtzman is correct that the general rule in this circuit is to stay rather than dismiss a
case pending arbitration. Halim v. Great Gatsby's Auction Gallery, Inc., 516 F.3d 557, 561 (7th
Cir. 2008). But this court has recognized an exception to that rule “[w]hen all of the claims
raised in a lawsuit are subject to arbitration. . . . In that event, a dismissal is appropriate because
there is nothing for the court to decide unless and until a party seeks confirmation of or
challenges the arbitrators’ award.” Olstad v. Chase Auto Fin. Corp., No. 17-cv-236, 2018 WL
501611, at *3 (W.D. Wis. Jan. 22, 2018). Because the entire case is subject to arbitration and
Holtzman does not identify any prejudice she will suffer as a result of dismissal, the court will
grant Credit One’s request to dismiss. If either side wishes to confirm or challenge the
arbitration decision at the conclusion of the proceedings, that party may move to reopen the
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. Defendant Credit One Bank, N.A.’s motion to compel arbitration and dismiss the
case, Dkt. 10, is GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED without prejudice.
2. The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Entered March 6, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
JAMES D. PETERSON
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?