Eddie Robinson v. EOR-ARK, LLC, 841 F.3d 781

Willie Robinson, Sr. signed an arbitration agreement on admission to Pine Hills nursing home in 2010; the agreement incorporated the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) Code of Procedure and listed five possible arbitration fora.
In 2009 (before the agreement), NAF entered a consent judgment agreeing not to process new consumer arbitrations; it is undisputed NAF stopped consumer arbitration, and the availability of the other four listed fora is unclear but assumed unavailable by the parties.
After Willie died, his son and estate administrator Eddie Robinson sued Pine Hills and affiliated entities in state court for alleged negligence/wrongful death; defendants moved to dismiss and compel arbitration and removed the case to federal court.
The arbitration agreement included a severability clause, stated it was governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), and provided that if a listed forum was unavailable the parties "may seek legal and other remedies."
The district court granted the motion to compel arbitration; the Eighth Circuit reviewed de novo and affirmed, holding the arbitration agreement enforceable and covering Robinson’s claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of arbitration agreement	Agreement unenforceable because NAF was unavailable	Agreement valid under Arkansas law despite NAF's unavailability	Agreement is valid and enforceable (Arkansas law controls validity)
Whether dispute must be arbitrated given NAF's unavailability	Robinson may litigate because parties were "denied the opportunity" to arbitrate before listed fora	FAA §5 requires courts to appoint a substitute arbitrator when named forum(s) lapse; parties must still arbitrate	Court must enforce arbitration; FAA §5 fills the gap and compels arbitration absent an integral-forum exception here
Whether the choice of NAF was integral (exception to FAA §5)	Selection of NAF was integral; if integral, court cannot appoint substitute and claim can be litigated	Agreement's language and severability leave open arbitration before other/alternative fora and remedies; no integral-forum showing	No integral-forum exception applied: selection was not integral, so FAA §5 substitute appointment applies
Whether defendants who did not sign can compel arbitration	Nonsignatory defendants cannot force arbitration	Nonsignatories closely related to facility (owners/operators/managers/agents) can compel to avoid eviscerating the agreement; agreement extends to successors, assigns, agents	Nonsignatory defendants may compel arbitration under Arkansas law given allegations of close relationship and agreement language

Schultz v. Verizon Wireless Servs., LLC, 833 F.3d 975 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review for arbitration questions)
Faber v. Menard, Inc., 367 F.3d 1048 (8th Cir. 2004) (two-step inquiry: valid agreement and scope)
3M Co. v. Amtex Sec., Inc., 542 F.3d 1193 (8th Cir. 2008) (motion to compel when agreement covers dispute)
Donaldson Co. v. Burroughs Diesel, Inc., 581 F.3d 726 (8th Cir. 2009) (state contract law governs arbitration agreement validity)
Courtyard Gardens Health & Rehab., LLC v. Arnold, 485 S.W.3d 669 (Ark. 2016) (Arkansas court held NAF's cessation did not by itself cancel the incorporated code)
Inetianbor v. CashCall, Inc., 768 F.3d 1346 (11th Cir. 2014) (discussing an "integral forum" exception to FAA §5)
DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, 136 S. Ct. 463 (2015) (state law governs contract interpretation when FAA does not address the issue)