2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 8-4-2010 

# C h arleswor th Nichol a s v

. Gr ap etree S hores Inc P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-3478

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" C h arle s wor th Nicho l as v

. Gr ape tr e e S hor e s Inc " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 805. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/8051 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 08- 3478 CH AR L E S WORT H NI CH OL AS

v. G R A P E T R E E S H O R E S IN C ,

D/ B/A D iv i C a rin a B a yR e so rt; P AT RI CK HE NR Y, A p p e llan ts A pp eal from t he D i stri ctC ou rtfor t he V i rgi n Isl and s,

D iv isio n o f

S t. C ro ix ( C i v. N o. 1- 05- cv- 00119) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H on. R aym ond L . Fi nch Subm i t t ed pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

D ece m ber1, 2009 B e f o re : M c K E E , C hi ef

C i r cui tJudge , F U E N T E S , C i r cui tJudge , a n d N Y G A A R D , Seni orC i r cui tJudge . ( O pi ni on fi l ed: A ugus t4, 2010)

OP I NI ON M c K E E , C hi ef

C i r cui tJudge . G r apetr ee Shor es , I nc. , d/b/ a/D i vi C ar i na B ayR es or t( her ei naft er“G r apetr ee” )
an d P atri ck H en ry , a G rap etree e m p loy ee , ap p ea l from an o rde r of the d istri ct co u rt d e n y in g th e irm o tio n to s ta ylitig a tio n f ile d a g a in s t th e m b yC h a rl e s w o rt h N ic h o la s , a2

f o rm e r G ra p e tre e e m p lo y e e , p e n d in g a rb itratio n . F o r th e re a so n s th a t f o llo w , w e w ill
a f f irm th e d istric t co u rt. B e c a u se w e w rite p rim a rilyf o r th e p a rties , w e w ill re c ite o n lya s m u c h o f th e f a c ts as i s nece s s aryfort he di s pos i t i on of thi s appea l . O n oraboutO ct ober29, 1999, N i chol as ent er ed i nt o an H our l yE m pl oym entA gr eementw i t h G r apetr ee. U ndert he t erm s of the A gr eement , N i chol as agr eed t o arbi t r at e “[ a] nycontr over s yorcl ai m ar i s i ng outof or
re latin g in a n yw a yto th is A g re e m e n t, t o th e b re a c h o f th is A g re e m e n t, an d /o r to E m pl oy ee’ s empl oym entw i t h E m pl oy er , ort o t he s us pens i on ort erm i nat i on of E m pl oy ee’ s empl oym entw i t h E m pl oy er . ” H our l yE m pl oy ee A gr eement , ¶ 16. N i chol as also ag ree d that “c lai m s o r m att ers a ri sing o u t of o r relat ing in an yw ayto . . . E m p loy ee ’s deal i ngs w i t h E m pl oy er. . . s hal l be cons i der ed arbi t r abl e. ” Id ., ¶ 1 7 . N i chol as w as s us pended on J ul y27, 2003, and ul t i m at el yt erm i nat ed byG r apetr ee, as a r es ul tof hi s uni on or gani zi ng act i vi t yatG r apetr ee on be hal f of the V i r gi n I s l ands W o rk e rs U n io n (“ V IW U ” ), A F L -C IO , L o c a l 6 1 1 . In re sp o n se , N ich o las f iled a n U n f

a ir L a b o r P ra c tice C h a rg e w ith th e N a tio n a l L a b o r R e latio n s B o a rd w ith re g a rd to h is
s us pens i on. O n D ece m ber12, 2003, N i chol as and G r apetr ee e nt er ed i nt o a Set t l ement A gr eementand G ener al R el eas e w hi ch pr ovi ded, i n r el evantpar t , t hatG r apetr ee a gr eed “thati tw i l l t r eatN i chol as ’ s s epar at i on fr om empl oym entas a vol unt aryr es i gnat i on and
s hal l r emove t he document at i on conce r ni ng t he t erm i nat i on fr om hi s per s onnel fi l e. ” A ft erl eavi ng hi s empl oym entatG r apetr ee, N i chol as beca m e the ac t i ng Pr es i dentN i chol as fi l ed s ui ti n t he Super i orC our tof the V i r gi n I s l ands . G r apetr ee a nd 1 H enryr emoved t he ac t i on t o t he di s t r i ctcour tpur s uantt o Sect i on 301 of Labor M a n a g e m e n t R e latio n s A c t. 3 of the V I W U and s oughtt o uni oni ze G r apetr ee’ s empl oy ees . I n J une 2004, he fi l ed a pet i t i on w i t h t he N at i onal L aborR el at i ons B oar d, r eques t i ng a new el ect i on of uni on o f f ic e rs f o r G ra p e tr e e e m p lo y e e s . In re sp o n se to N ich o las ’ o rg a n izin g e f f o rts, G ra p e tre e h e ld a m e e tin g o f its
e m p lo y e e s o n J u n e 2 2 , 2 0 0 5 . N ic h o la s a lle g e s th a t a t th a t m e e tin g , P a tr ic k H e n ry, a G r apetr ee e m pl oy ee, m ade f al s e s t at ement s abouthi m t hatamount ed t o defa m at i on and
s l ander , i ncl udi ng, butnotl i m i t ed t o, a s t at ementt hatN i chol as had bee n t erm i nat ed by G ra p e tre e f

o r m isc o n d u c t. N i chol as t hen fi l ed an a ct i on agai ns tG r apetr ee a nd H enryal l egi ng defa m at i on, br eac h of the Set t l ementA gr eement , and i nt ent i onal and negl i genti nfl i ct i on of emot i onal di s t r es s . I n t i m e, G r apetr ee a nd H enryfi l ed a mot i on t o s t ayt he l i t i gat i on, cont endi ng

1 t hatN i chol as ’ s cl ai m s ar e governed byt he arbi t r at i on pr ovi s i ons i n t he H our l yE m pl oy ee A gr eement . O n J ul y245, 2008, t he di s t r i ctcour tdeni ed the mot i on t o s t ay , hol di ng t hat N i chol as ’ cl ai m s “do notar i s e outof orr el at e t o t he H our l yE m pl oy ee A gr eement . ” A pp. 4. W e agr ee w i t h t he di s t r i ctcour t . A s i texpl ai ned: A lth o u g h th e d e f

a m a tio n c laim s c o n c e rn sta tem e n ts th a t w e re a lleg e d ly m ad e a b o u t th e re aso n s tha t N icho las i s n o lon g er e m p loy ed b y[G rap etree], t heydo notar i s e outof orr el at e t o hi s s us pens i on ort erm i nat i on fr om [ G ra p e tre e ]. In th is a c tio n , N ich o las d o e s n o t co m p lain a b o u t th e m a n n e r in w h ich h is em p loy m en t end ed w ith [G rap etree]. H is acc u sati o n s co n ce rn4

onl yw hat[G r apetr ee] and H enrys ai d abouthi m t o ot her s , y ear s aft ert he en d ing o f h is em p loy m en t. T h e c lai m s d o n o t i n v o lve “ E m p loy ee ’s d e a lin g s w ith E m p lo y e r,” b e c a u se h is d e a lin g s w ith [ G ra p e tre e ] w ith r es pectt o hi s pos t - empl oym entor gani zi ng eff or t s ar e nott he dea l i ngs of an “Em pl oy ee” w i t h hi s “Em pl oy er . ” R ather , t heyar e the dea l i ngs of a uni on o rg a n ize r w ith a c o m p a n ya n d its m a n a g e m e n t. A p p . 4 -5 . F o r th e se re a so n s, w e w ill a f f irm th e d istric t co u rt.- 1-

FU E N T E S, C i r cui tJ udge, di s s ent i ng. I re sp e c tf

u llyd iss e n t b e c a u se , in m yv iew , N ich o las ’s to rt c laim s f a ll sq u a re ly
w i t hin the b road scop e of the E m ploym ent A greem ent’ s arbitrat i on cl ause. T hat cl ause s ta te s th a t “ [ a ]n yc o n tr o v e rs yo r c la im ” th a t a ri s e s o u t o f o r r e la te s “ in a n yf

a s h io n to . . . t he s us pens i on ort erm i nat i on of Em pl oy ee’ s empl oym ent ” i s s ubj ectt o arbi t r at i on. ( A pp. at28. ) T he A gr eementm akes cl eart hatcl ai m s for“def amat i on, i nfl i ct i on of emot i onal d istre ss , an d a ll o th e r m a tters so u n d in g in to rt” th a t re late to th e e m p lo ym e n t re latio n sh ip
ori t s t erm i nat i on ar e arbi t r abl e. ( I d. at29. ) N i chol as ’ s cont ent i on t hathe w as defa m ed byt he s t at ementof Patr i ck H enry , G r apetr ee’ s gener al m anage r , t hatN i chol as w as t erm i nat ed form i s conductcert ai nl yr el at es t o t he t erm i nat i on of hi s empl oym ent . T he fa ct th at N icho las w as n o lon g er a G rap etree e m p loy ee w h en the a ll eg ed lyd ef am atory sta tem e n t w a s m a d e is b e sid e th e p o in t— th e A g re e m e n t ex p re ss lya p p lies n o t o n lyto cl ai m s addr es s i ng “Em pl oy ee’ s deal i ngs w i t h E m pl oy er , ” butal s o t o t or tcl ai m s l i ke N i chol as ’ s t hatr el at e i n anyw ayt o t he “t erm i nat i on of Em pl oy ee’ s empl oym ent . ” ( I d. at 28. ) W e have hel d t hat“unl es s i tm aybe s ai d w i t h pos i t i ve as s ur ance t hatt he arbi t r at i on c lau se is n o t su sc e p tib le o f a n in ter p re tatio n th a t co v e rs th e a ss e rte d d isp u te,” a m o tio n to compel arbi t r at i on s houl d be gr ant ed. M edtr oni c A V E , I nc. v. A dvance d C ar di ovas cul ar Sy s t ems, I nc. , 247 F. 3d 44, 55 ( 3d C i r . 2001) . Such as s ur ance i s l acki ng i n t hi s cas e, and I w o u ld th e re f

o re v a c a te a n d re m a n d f o r f u rt h e r p ro c e e d in g s .