United States Tenth Circuit

In an appeal from the denial of Defendant's motion to compel arbitration in a commercial pharmacy contract dispute, the order is affirmed in part, where one of Plaintiff's claims did not fall within the scope of the arbitration clause at issue; but reversed in part, where, under the Federal Arbitration Act, two factually distinct injuries pleaded in the same causes of action in a complaint constitute distinct "controversies or claims" whose arbitrability may be separately evaluated.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/02/2009
• Published 06/02/2009

Judges

• LUCERO, Circuit Judge., Before LUCERO, O'BRIEN, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Michael S. Lee, Howrey LLP (Mark Banner, Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, P.C.;  John D. Briggs and Michael G. Cowie, Howrey LLP, with him on the briefs), Salt Lake City, UT, for Defendant-Appellant., Bradford D. Barron, Gibbon, Barron & Barron, P.C., (Bob L. Latham, Ken E. Wagner, Marcus N. Ratcliff, and Allison L. Thompson, Latham, Wagner, Steele & Lehman, P.C.;  Richard D. Gibbon and Zachary T. Barron, Gibbon, Barron & Barron, P.C., with him on the briefs), Tulsa, OK, for Plaintiff-Appellee.