Diversicare Leasing Corp. v. Annette Hall
700 F. App'x 524
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Hall, as executor of Alliene Menshouse’s estate, sued Diversicare in Kentucky state court over claims arising from Menshouse’s residency at a Diversicare facility.
- Diversicare filed a separate action in federal district court to compel arbitration under an arbitration agreement between the parties.
- The district court granted Diversicare’s motion to compel arbitration, stayed the federal proceeding, and enjoined Hall from continuing the state-court action.
- Hall moved for reconsideration in district court; the motion was denied, and she appealed the denial to the Sixth Circuit.
- Diversicare moved to dismiss the appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction, arguing statutory limits on appeals of orders compelling arbitration and staying proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Sixth Circuit has jurisdiction to review the district court’s order compelling arbitration | Hall sought appellate review of the district court’s denial of reconsideration and underlying orders | Diversicare argued §16(b) of the FAA bars appeals of orders directing arbitration and staying district-court proceedings | No jurisdiction under 9 U.S.C. §16(b); appeal dismissed |
| Whether the court can review the district court’s stay of the federal action pending arbitration | Hall challenged the stay as part of the appeal | Diversicare contended §16(b)(1) prohibits interlocutory appeals of stays pending arbitration | Stay is not appealable; §16(b)(1) bars review |
| Whether the court can review the injunction enjoining the state-court action | Hall argued the injunction should be reviewable under §1292(a)(1) for interlocutory appeals of injunctions | Diversicare relied on controlling Sixth Circuit precedent that §16(b) prevents appeals of injunctions tied to arbitration orders | No; Preferred Care controls and precludes §1292(a)(1) jurisdiction |
| Whether Hall could invoke §1292(b) certification to appeal a controlling question of law | Hall did not obtain district-court §1292(b) certification | Diversicare noted absence of certification | Without §1292(b) certification, interlocutory appeal not permitted |
Key Cases Cited
- Preferred Care of Del., Inc. v. Estate of Hopkins, 845 F.3d 765 (6th Cir. 2017) (holding that 9 U.S.C. § 16(b) bars appeals of orders compelling arbitration, staying federal proceedings, and enjoining state-court litigation)