Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-15-13114/USCOURTS-ca11-15-13114-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
PJ United Inc
Appellant
Douglas Stephens
Appellant
James Sullivan
Appellee

Document Text:

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 15-13114

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 7:13-cv-01275-LSC

JAMES SULLIVAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PJ UNITED INC.,

DOUGLAS STEPHENS,

Defendants-Appellants.

 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Alabama 

________________________

(May 23, 2016)

Before HULL and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and MORENO,* District Judge.

__________ 

* The Honorable Federico A. Moreno, United States District Judge for the Southern District of 

Florida, sitting by designation.

USCA11 Case: 15-13114 Date Filed: 05/23/2016 Page: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM: 

We have had the benefit of oral argument, and have carefully reviewed the 

briefs and the record. For the reasons fully discussed at oral argument, we 

conclude that the judgment of the district court should be affirmed.

The Arbitration Agreement in this case expressly delegated to the Arbitrator 

the resolution of any issue concerning the enforceability of any provision of the 

Agreement. The Agreement, under the heading, “Different Parts of Agreement,”

provides:

I agree that the arbitrator, and not any federal, state, or local court or 

agency, shall have the exclusive authority to resolve any dispute 

relating to the interpretation, arbitrability, applicability, enforceability 

or formation of this Agreement including, but not limited to, any 

claim that all or any part of this Agreement is void or voidable.

The Arbitrator relied on a decision of the NLRB holding that the waiver of 

class arbitration in this very Agreement was unenforceable pursuant to the National 

Labor Relations Act.1

 The Arbitrator then applied Alabama law: that a contract to 

commit an illegal act should not be enforced as written but rather should be 

 1 Defendants-Appellants do not challenge the NLRB decision in this court.

USCA11 Case: 15-13114 Date Filed: 05/23/2016 Page: 2 of 3
3

reformed.2 Accordingly, the Arbitrator excised the provision of the Agreement

waiving class arbitration. The Arbitrator then construed the Arbitration Agreement 

with that provision excised.

Our review of the Arbitrator’s decision is limited: “the sole question . . . is 

whether the arbitrator (even arguably) interpreted the parties’ contract, not whether 

he got its meaning right or wrong.” Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, 133 S.Ct. 

2064, 2068 (2013). We cannot conclude that the Arbitrator in this case failed to at 

least arguably base his decision on the text of the parties’ contract and the relevant 

law. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

 2 On appeal, Defendants-Appellants do not challenge this statement of Alabama law. 

USCA11 Case: 15-13114 Date Filed: 05/23/2016 Page: 3 of 3