158 So. 3d 682
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2015Background
- Robert Taylor, a Florida truck driver, was given and signed an AMS Staff Leasing employment form at a job site days after hire; he did not read it and claims he lacked glasses.
- The AMS form included an arbitration clause requiring disputes to be arbitrated in Dallas, Texas under Texas law/AAA rules.
- Taylor was injured on the job in January 2013, later fired, and sued AMS and Diamond K for retaliatory discharge under Fla. Stat. § 440.205.
- AMS filed a special limited appearance and moved to abate and compel arbitration; the trial court denied the motion after live testimony about signing circumstances.
- The trial court found the arbitration clause invalid because it did not exclude workers’ compensation claims and required a Florida hourly worker to arbitrate in Texas.
- AMS appealed; the Fourth DCA reviewed the arbitration denial de novo and reversed, directing the trial court to compel arbitration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of arbitration agreement | Taylor: clause unenforceable because it didn’t exempt workers’ compensation matters, was procured under duress/unconscionable, and forced travel to Texas | AMS: agreement valid, governed by FAA because transaction involves interstate commerce, and clause covers retaliatory discharge claim | Agreement valid and enforceable as to the retaliatory discharge claim; FAA governs and foreign forum is permissible |
| Scope re: workers’ compensation | Taylor: clause invalid for failing to exclude WC claims and would prevent vindication of statutory rights | AMS: did not seek arbitration of WC benefits claim; only seeks to arbitrate retaliatory discharge claim | Arbitration of retaliatory discharge claim does not violate public policy; absence of WC exclusion does not invalidate clause here |
| Waiver of arbitration right | Taylor: AMS waived arbitration by not seeking arbitration in the workers’ compensation matter | AMS: promptly moved to compel arbitration and did not take inconsistent actions in litigation | No waiver: AMS filed motion to compel early and did not actively litigate inconsistent with arbitration right |
| Duress / unconscionability defenses | Taylor: signing under threat of being sent home amounted to duress/procedural unconscionability | AMS: conduct insufficient to show improper coercion; no substantive unconscionability shown | No duress or unconscionability proven; plaintiff failed to meet burden to avoid arbitration |
Key Cases Cited
- Shetty v. Palm Beach Radiation Oncology Assocs.-Sunderam K. Shetty, M.D., P.A., 915 So.2d 1233 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (standard of review for arbitration motions)
- Seifert v. U.S. Home Corp., 750 So.2d 633 (Fla. 1999) (elements for compelling arbitration and public-policy analysis)
- Shotts v. OP Winter Haven, Inc., 86 So.3d 456 (Fla. 2011) (court decides validity and public-policy challenges to arbitration clauses)
- Damora v. Stresscon Int’l, Inc., 324 So.2d 80 (Fla. 1975) (Florida Arbitration Code view on out-of-state arbitration clauses)
- Default Proof Credit Card Sys., Inc. v. Friedland, 992 So.2d 442 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (FAA can preempt Florida rule against out-of-state arbitration when interstate commerce present)
- Mintz & Fraade, P.C. v. Beta Drywall Acquisition, LLC, 59 So.3d 1173 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (broad reading of interstate commerce for FAA coverage)
- Audio Visual Innovations, Inc. v. Spiessbach, 119 So.3d 522 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (arbitration of retaliatory discharge does not defeat remedial purpose of statute)
- O’Keefe Architects, Inc. v. CED Constr. Partners, Ltd., 944 So.2d 181 (Fla. 2006) (waiver via active participation or inconsistent conduct)
- Romano ex rel. Romano v. Manor Care, Inc., 861 So.2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (example of substantive unconscionability when arbitration prevents vindication of statutory rights)