Case Name: METROPCS COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., Appellant, v. Jorge PORTER, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2013-05-15
Citations: 114 So. 3d 348
Docket Number: No. 3D12-3077
Parties: METROPCS COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., Appellant, v. Jorge PORTER, Appellee.
Judges: Before ROTHENBERG and EMAS, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 114
Pages: 348–348

Head Matter:
METROPCS COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al., Appellant, v. Jorge PORTER, Appellee.
No. 3D12-3077.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 15, 2013.
Carlton Fields and Aaron S. Weiss and David L. Luck; Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP and Michael J. Stortz, California, pro hac vice, Miami, for appellant.
Gonzalo R. Dorta and Christian W. Waugh, Ocala, for appellee.
Before ROTHENBERG and EMAS, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

Opinion:
SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.
The order under review denying arbitration is reversed for a determination after an evidentiary hearing of the threshold issue of whether the arbitration clause was contained in a binding agreement between the parties. See Travelers Ins. Co. v. Irby Constr. Co. 816 So.2d 829, 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Melamed, 425 So.2d 127, 129 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Krutchik v. Chase Bank USA N.A., 531 F.Supp.2d 1359, 1365 (S.D.Fla.2008). We express no view as to the result of any other issue which may arise from that ruling. See McKenzie Check Advance of Fla., LLC v. Betts, 112 So.3d 1176 (Fla.2013); Hancock v. AT & T, Inc., 701 F.3d 1248 (10th Cir.2012); Rampersad v. Primeco Personal Commc'ns, L.P., 2001 WL 34872572 (S.D.Fla.2001); Schafer v. AT & T Wireless Servs., Inc., 2005 WL 850459 (S.D.Ill. 2005); Briceno v. Sprint Spectrum, L.P., 911 So.2d 176, 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).
Reversed and remanded.