Opinion ID: 1702301
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Did the parties enter a valid arbitration agreement?

Text: ¶ 17. Sullivan's Complaint is based on the Stock Purchase Agreement (Tritel) and the Mutual Release and Termination Agreement, neither of which contained an arbitration provision. However, all parties agree that both documents were part of the Transaction Documents. ¶ 18. The arbitration provision at issue was included in the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement. The provision, entitled Resolution of Disputes, states in pertinent part: All disputes, controversies and claims arising in connection with this Agreement that are not settled by agreement between the parties shall be finally settled under the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association (AAA) in effect from time to time.... The award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding and judgment thereon may be entered in any court having jurisdiction.... ¶ 19. Sullivan argues that the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement clearly and unambiguously provides that only disputes arising in connection therewith are subject to arbitration. Sullivan claims that disputes arising under the Stock Purchase Agreement (Tritel) and the Mutual Release and Termination Agreement are not subject to the arbitration provision. ¶ 20. Sullivan relies on Carro Rivera v. Parade of Toys, Inc., 950 F.Supp. 449 (D.P.R.1996), in support of his argument. In Carro, the Plaintiff sued for breach of a Distributor Agreement, containing an arbitration clause which limited it application to disputes arising out of this Purchase Order. The court held that the clause did not apply to the Distributor Agreement and stated: Although the arbitration clause is contained in the Distributor Agreement, it appears to refer to disputes arising under a separate document  signed on the same day as the Distributor Agreement  entitled Product Order Form.... The Court finds that the arbitration clause's reference to this Purchase Order reflects an agreement to arbitrate disputes arising under the Product Order Form, no the Distributor Agreement. Id. at 452. The court further stated that [s]ince these claims do not `arise under' the Purchase Order, they are not subject to arbitration. Id. at 453. Similarly, Sullivan asserts that since his claims do not arise under the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, they are not subject to arbitration. ¶ 21. Sullivan also argues that the term Transaction Documents is given a specific definition and if the defendants intended to arbitrate disputes arising under the Transaction Documents, they could have easily drafted the arbitration provision to include all disputes in connection with this Agreement and the Transaction Documents. ¶ 22. Defendants, on the other hand, argue that the plain language of the agreements establishes that the parties intended and agreed to submit to arbitration any and all disputes arising under any of the Transaction Documents. Defendants point out that an Integrated Transaction provision was included in some of the Transaction Documents, including the Mutual Release and Termination Agreement, which states: The provisions of this Agreement are an integral part of, and are necessary consideration for, the Transaction Documents and the settlement of existing disputes between and among the parties. Any breach of, or default under, this Agreement or any of the Transaction Documents shall constitute a breach of, and a default under, each of this Agreement and the Transaction Documents. ¶ 23. An Entire Agreement and Amendment provision was also included in some of the Transaction Documents, including the Stock Purchase Agreement (Tritel), which states: This Agreement and the Transaction Documents set forth all, and supersede and replace all prior covenants, promises, agreements, conditions and understandings between the parties concerning the transactions contemplated hereby, and there are no oral or written, express or implied, covenants, promises agreements, conditions or understandings, between and among the parties except as contained in this Agreement and the Transaction Documents. ¶ 24. Defendants assert that the Integrated Transaction provision and the Entire Agreement and Amendment provision have the legal effect of making the terms of each of the Transaction Documents an integral part of and integrated into all of the Transaction Documents, producing one global settlement agreement. ¶ 25. Sullivan concedes that the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement contains the arbitration provision, and he further concedes that some of the documents do contain an integration provision, but he denies that the provision integrated the arbitration provision into all the Transaction Documents.