1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20- 21886-Civ-COOKE/GOODMAN

JESSICA CAPLIN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

EVERGLADES COLLEGE INC. 

d/b/a KEISER UNIVERSITY 

COLLEGE OF CHIROPRACTIC 

MEDICINE,

Defendant.

____________________________________/

ORDER COMPELLING ARBITRATION AND STAYING CASE

THIS MATTER is before me on Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and 

Dismiss Complaint (ECF No. 5). For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s Motion is 

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 

I. BACKGROUND

In April 2016, Plaintiff Jessica Caplin (“Caplin”) was accepted into the chiropractic 

program at Defendant Keiser University’s College of Chiropractic Medicine (“Keiser 

University”). Compl. ECF No. 1 at ¶ 17. Prior to her admission at Keiser University, 

Caplin had been diagnosed with dyslexia and other learning disabilities, which Keiser 

University was aware of before her admission. Id. at ¶¶ 16, 17. After her enrollment, 

Caplin requested and was granted accommodations to pursue her studies. Id. at ¶ 18. 

However, approximately two years later, Caplin requested additional accommodations, 

which were all denied. After numerous attempts at redress, on May 5, 2020, Caplin brought 

the instant action against Keiser University, alleging violations under Section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. See id.

On April 22, 2016, Caplin signed an agreement titled Enrollment Policies and 

Procedures, which included an arbitration provision. In relevant part, the arbitration 

provision states as follows:

Case 1:20-cv-21886-MGC Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2020 Page 1 of 3
2

It is agreed that, in the event the parties to this agreement are unable to 

amicably resolve any dispute, claim and/or controversy arising out of or 

relating to this agreement, or if a claim is made by either against the other or 

any agent or affiliate of the other, the dispute, claim and/or controversy shall 

be resolved by arbitration administered by the American Arbitration 

Association under its Commercial Arbitration Rules.

ECF No. 5-1 at 2. Defendant now moves this Court to enforce the above agreement and 

compel the parties to binding arbitration. See Def.’s Mot., ECF No. 5. 

II. LEGAL STANDARDS

Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, written arbitration agreements “shall be 

valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for 

the revocation of any contract.” 9 U.S.C. § 2. “[C]ourts must rigorously enforce arbitration 

agreements according to their terms.” Walthour v. Chipio Windshield Repair, LLC, 745 F.3d 

1326, 1329-30 (11th Cir. 2014). Therefore, a court will enforce an arbitration agreement 

where the movant shows that a written agreement to arbitrate the claims in question exists, 

and that there are no external legal constraints that foreclose the parties’ agreement to 

arbitrate. See Klay v. Pacificare Health Sys., Inc., 389 F.3d 1191, 1200 (11th Cir. 2004).

III.DISCUSSION

Caplin does not dispute that a written agreement to arbitrate exists, nor does she 

dispute that she signed the agreement. Rather, Caplin contends that the arbitration 

agreement does not cover the claims asserted here. Specifically, Caplin argues that she 

“could not have foreseen the extensive discrimination and retaliatory behavior she would 

receive while enrolled at Keiser nor did she assent to such treatment under the Agreement, 

and thus could not have intended to voluntarily waive litigation of her federal statutory 

rights under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act.” ECF No. 10 at 5. 

As noted above, the arbitration agreement here includes a provision that requires 

arbitration on any claims “against the other or any agent or affiliate of the other.” ECF No. 

5-1 at 2. The inclusion of this language indicates conclusively that “the parties agreed to 

arbitrate any and all claims against each other, with no exceptions.” Brown v. ITT Consumer 

Fin. Corp., 211 F.3d 1217, 1221 (11th Cir. 2020). Thus, Caplin’s claims under the ADA and 

the Rehabilitation Act are subject to arbitration under the Parties’ agreement. See Cheshire v. 

Case 1:20-cv-21886-MGC Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2020 Page 2 of 3
3

Fitness & Sports Clubs, LLC, 382 F. Supp. 3d 1329, 1331 (S.D. Fla. 2019) (compelling parties 

to arbitrate Plaintiff’s ADA claims). Relatedly, the Eleventh Circuit has opined that 

“statutory claims...can be subject to mandatory arbitration,” and that “an arbitration 

agreement [need not] specifically list every federal or state statute it purports to cover.” Id.

1221-22. The Court therefore finds that a written agreement to arbitrate exists, and that the 

arbitration agreement covers the claims at issue here. Moreover, Plaintiff has not 

established that there are external legal constraints that ought to preclude arbitration.

Although the Defendant has asked the Court to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims, Plaintiff 

has requested that the matter be stayed if the Court grants Defendant’s Motion to compel. 

Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, when a court concludes an issue is “referable to 

arbitration under an agreement in writing” the court “shall on application of one of the 

parties stay the trial of the action until such arbitration has been had in accordance with the 

terms of the agreement.” 9 U.S.C. § 3. Because Plaintiff has requested a stay, the Court will 

stay the matter while the parties arbitrate. Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion (ECF No. 5) is 

GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 

IV.CONCLUSION

It is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration 

and Dismiss Complaint (ECF No. 5) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The 

parties are ORDERED to binding arbitration in accordance with the terms set forth in the 

arbitration agreement. This case is STAYED pending the resolution of the arbitration. The 

Clerk shall administratively CLOSE this matter. All pending motions, if any, are DENIED 

as moot.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Miami, Florida, this 30th day of October 2020.

Copies furnished to:

Jonathan Goodman, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Counsel of record

Case 1:20-cv-21886-MGC Document 19 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2020 Page 3 of 3