United States Sixth Circuit

In a contract dispute involving whether plaintiff was due additional payment from defendant based on a pharmacy's earnings, or lack thereof, denial of defendant's motion to compel arbitration is reversed, where: 1) the district court erred in holding that defendant waived that its contractual arbitration right through its prelitigation conduct; and 2) plaintiff's claims fell within the scope of the contract's arbitration clause.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/22/2008
• Published 08/22/2008

Judges

• Before:  SUHRHEINRICH, CLAY, and COOK, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Richard A. Cirillo, King & Spalding, New York, New York, for Appellant.  James D. Curphey, Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  Richard A. Cirillo, King & Spalding, New York, New York, Alexander M. Andrews, Rebecca B. Jacobs, Ulmer & Berne, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  James D. Curphey, Kyle T. Shaw, Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.