Decision Provides Arbitration Clause Guidance, But Questions Persist
The Appellate Division's decision in 'Matter of Bergassi Group v. Allied World Insurance Co.' offers some straightforward, but valuable, guidance about the interplay between the FAA and CPLR Art. 75, and raises some interesting questions for further review.
April 15, 2021 at 02:00 PM
6 minute read
Agreements to arbitrate are supposed to reduce the amount of litigation in the world. By that standard, the agreement to arbitrate between Bergassi Group LLC (Bergassi) and Allied World Insurance Company (Allied World) has been an utter failure. After Allied World served Bergassi with a demand for arbitration in September 2019, Bergassi launched a proceeding under CPLR Art. 75 to stay the arbitration. In January 2020, Supreme Court, New York County (Tanya Kennedy, J.) granted a permanent stay of arbitration. Pending appellate review of that decision, Bergassi sued Allied World and its attorneys in Westchester County, alleging that Allied World's demand to arbitrate constituted malicious prosecution and abuse of process (Index No. 53708/2020). On April 13, 2021, the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed the permanent stay of arbitration in the New York County matter. Only time will tell if the arbitration clause that started all of this will spawn additional litigation. In any case, the Appellate Division's decision offers some straightforward, but valuable, guidance about the interplay between the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and CPLR Art. 75, and raises some interesting questions for further review.
|Background
According to documents filed in the Westchester action, Allied World is a New Hampshire insurance company licensed to issue surety bonds in New York. Bergassi is a New York surety bond broker that engaged in the business of soliciting surety business as an independent contractor on behalf of Allied World. Bergassi and Allied World had entered into a written agency agreement that contained an arbitration clause. Between 2013 and 2017, Allied World authorized Bergassi to issue surety bonds to a construction company operating in Manhattan. When the construction company and several of its co-owners were indicted for various crimes, the construction company defaulted on its projects and Allied World found itself on the hook for more than $15 million in losses under the surety bonds. Allied World then initiated arbitration proceedings against Bergassi in an attempt to hold Bergassi liable for its losses on the grounds that Bergassi knew of, but did not disclose to Allied World, links between the construction company and an individual who was eventually indicted for crimes related to the construction company's activities.
After Bergassi commenced a proceeding under New York's arbitration statute, CPLR Art. 75, for a stay of the arbitration, the court held oral argument on Jan. 15, 2020. At the hearing, the court agreed with counsel for Allied World that the CPLR, and not the FAA, governed the dispute because the case did not present any conflict between New York and federal law. Finding the agreement to arbitrate to be ambiguous, and the claims at issue in the arbitration to be "inextricably intertwined" with those at issue in other legal actions, the court granted Allied World's request to permanently stay the arbitration.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPreemptive Litigation: A Potential Approach for a Precise Situation
13 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Medicaid Whistleblowers Awarded $37M Plus Interest
- 2Pfizer Faces Multiple Lawsuits Over Recalled Sickle-Cell Medication
- 3Top 10 Law Firm Videos to Produce in 2025
- 4Elizabeth Cooper of Simpson Thacher on Building Teams in a 'Relationship Business'
- 5Why Hogan Lovells and Perkins Coie Reversed, Will Now Pay Out Special Bonuses to Associates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.