Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
SNAZZI REPORTING, INC., Plaintiff–respondent, v. VERITEXT, LLC, Defendant–Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered on or about August 1, 2023, which denied defendant's motion to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 or compel arbitration pursuant to CPLR 7503 and the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion to compel arbitration granted.
The parties agreed to arbitrate all claims arising out of or relating to their agreement, their work relationship, and the services provided by plaintiff to defendant. The contract states in pertinent part, “Any dispute concerning ․ the applicability of the FAA shall be decided by a court ․ Any other issues concerning arbitrability of a particular issue or claim ․ shall be resolved by the arbitrator, not a court.” Plaintiff does not dispute the applicability of the FAA; rather, plaintiff is disputing whether its claims under the Freelance Isn't Free Act (FIFA) (Administrative Code of City of N.Y. § 20–927 et seq.) are arbitrable. Pursuant to the parties’ contract, this issue must be resolved by the arbitrator (see Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 586 U.S. 63, 65, 67–69, 139 S.Ct. 524, 202 L.Ed.2d 480 [2019]).
Relying on Administrative Code § 20–935(a) (“Except as otherwise provided by law, any provision of a contract purporting to waive rights under this chapter is void as against public policy”), plaintiff contends that it would violate public policy to force it to arbitrate its FIFA claims. Plaintiff's contention is unavailing.
Where the FAA is applicable, as it is here, it preempts state and local law on the enforceability of an arbitration clause (see Fletcher v. Kidder, Peabody & Co., 81 N.Y.2d 623, 630, 601 N.Y.S.2d 686, 619 N.E.2d 998 [1993], cert denied 510 U.S. 993, 114 S.Ct. 554, 126 L.Ed.2d 455 [1993]). Plaintiff, as the party seeking to avoid arbitration, “must demonstrate a congressional intent to preclude a waiver of a judicial forum” (id. at 632, 601 N.Y.S.2d 686, 619 N.E.2d 998 [internal quotation marks omitted]). Plaintiff has failed to do so.
Because plaintiff's claims must be arbitrated, we do not reach the merits of her claims.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 2957
Decided: October 31, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)