144 F. Supp. 3d 522
S.D.N.Y.2015Background
- Gonder began working for Dollar Tree on December 9, 2014 and electronically signed (via company portal) an Employee Handbook and a Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Claims on that date.
- The Agreement required arbitration of employment-related claims, including discrimination and retaliation, and conditioned the offer of employment on its execution.
- Dollar Tree terminated Gonder in January 2015; Gonder filed EEOC and DHR complaints (including a duplicative DHR filing while pro se).
- Dollar Tree responded to the DHR and preserved defenses; Gonder later obtained counsel, received an EEOC right-to-sue letter, and asked the DHR to dismiss its claims for administrative convenience.
- Gonder sued in New York state court; Dollar Tree removed to federal court on diversity grounds and moved to dismiss and compel arbitration.
- The court found an executed arbitration agreement (supported by CareerLaunch access logs) covering Gonder’s claims and considered whether Dollar Tree waived its arbitration right.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existence/validity of arbitration agreement | Gonder does not recall signing and says defendant produced an unexecuted agreement | Dollar Tree produced the electronically signed agreement and access logs showing Gonder signed on Dec. 9, 2014 | Agreement is valid and signed; no fact issue |
| Consideration for arbitration in at-will employment | Agreement is unenforceable because at-will employment provides no consideration (citing out-of-circuit authority) | The offer to commence employment conditioned on signing the Agreement constitutes sufficient consideration | Agreement enforceable; consideration adequate |
| Scope of arbitration | (Not disputed) Gonder’s NYCHRL discrimination and retaliation claims fall outside arbitration | Agreement expressly covers employment discrimination and retaliation claims | Claims fall within arbitration scope |
| Waiver of arbitration right | Dollar Tree engaged in administrative proceedings and removal, so it waived arbitration | Dollar Tree acted promptly after removal and engaged only minimally; administrative participation does not equal waiver | No waiver: minimal delay/litigation and no prejudice to Gonder; compel arbitration |
Key Cases Cited
- Bensadoun v. Jobe-Riat, 316 F.3d 171 (2d Cir. 2003) (standard for evaluating executed signature and contract validity)
- Genesco, Inc. v. T. Kakiuchi & Co., 815 F.2d 840 (2d Cir. 1987) (apply general contract principles to determine formation of arbitration agreements)
- Louis Dreyfus Negoce S.A. v. Blystad Shipping & Trading, Inc., 252 F.3d 218 (2d Cir. 2001) (strong presumption in favor of arbitration and resolving doubts in favor of arbitrability)
- Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp., 500 U.S. 20 (1991) (federal statutory claims can be arbitrable)
- Thyssen, Inc. v. Calypso Shipping Corp., 310 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2002) (factors for determining waiver of arbitration right)
- Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 537 U.S. 79 (2002) (procedural questions of arbitrability are for arbitrators when parties’ agreement delegates them)