Opinion ID: 1630266
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: whether the federal arbitration act applies to this case.

Text: ¶ 6. In IP Timberlands Operating Co. v. Denmiss Corp., 726 So.2d 96, 104, 106, 107, 108 (Miss.1998), we recognized the applicability of arbitration for resolving disputes by stating that we will respect the right of an individual or an entity to agree in advance of a dispute to arbitration or other alternative dispute resolution.    Articles of agreement to arbitrate, and awards thereon are to be liberally construed so as to encourage the settlement of disputes and the presumption will be indulged in favor of the validity of arbitration proceedings.    In enacting § 2 of the Arbitration Act, Congress declared a national policy favoring arbitration and withdrew the power of the states to require a judicial forum for the resolution of claims which the contracting parties agreed to resolve by arbitration. Congress has thus mandated the enforcement of arbitration agreements. The Arbitration Act, resting on Congress's authority under the Commerce Clause, creates a body of federal substantive law that is applicable in both state and federal courts. The sine qua non of the FAA's applicability to a particular dispute is an agreement to arbitrate the dispute in a contract which evidences a transaction in interstate commerce. Doubts as to the availability of arbitration must be resolved in favor of arbitration. [U]nless it can be said with positive assurance that an arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation which would cover the dispute at issue, then a stay pending arbitration should be granted.    In addition to establishing a strong presumption in favor of arbitration, the Act also limits the role of the court to determining whether an issue is arbitrable. The court's sole function is to determine whether the claim is referable to arbitration. Once that determination is made, the court may not delve further into the dispute. The courts ... have no business weighing the merits of a particular claim, or determining whether there is particular language in the written instrument which will support the claim. (citations omitted). ¶ 7. Because Performance Toyota is a Tennessee corporation with its principal place of business in Memphis, Tennessee, and Russell is an adult resident citizen of Lee County, Mississippi, we find that this matter evidences a transaction in interstate commerce and the FAA therefore applies to it.