Myer v. Americo Life, Inc.
2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 4470
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Arbitration between Myer/Strider Marketing and Americo Life and related insurers; final AAA panel included Figari (disqualified), Sayles, and a third arbitrator; award favorable to appellants issued June 29, 2007.
- Arbitration clause 3.3 provides three arbitrators with Americo and Myer each appointing one and those two appointing a third; AAA rules apply, with discovery rights for Americo and Meyer for 90 days after final appointment.
- Dispute arose in 2005; AAA disqualified Figari; Sayles appointed; proceeding continued; final award rendered in 2007.
- Appellees moved to vacate/modify the award; trial court vacated and denied confirmation, finding the panel was not properly appointed under the agreement and that AAA rules were not properly followed.
- Texas Supreme Court reversed the trial court earlier decision and remanded; on remand, court held the agreement is not ambiguous, AAA controls selection, and vacatur was improper; case remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the arbitration agreement ambiguous regarding arbitrator selection? | Myer argues the two provisions must be harmonized with AAA rules. | Appellees contend provisions are not ambiguous; AAA governs only post-appointment proceedings. | Not ambiguous; AAA governs selection; appeal to AAA rules valid. |
| Can AAA disqualify an arbitrator and is its decision conclusive? | AAA disqualification of Figari was improper; panel selection violated agreement. | AAA acted within its rules; its disqualification decision was proper. | AAA did not manifestly disregard its rules; vacatur inappropriate. |
| Whether the arbitration award can be vacated for improper panel appointment under FAA grounds. | Vacatur warranted due to improper appointment under agreement. | Panel was valid under agreement and AAA rules; vacatur unjustified. | Vacatur improper; reverse and remand for further proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hall St. Assocs., LLC v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (U.S. 2008) (exclusive grounds for vacating under FAA)
- Roehrs v. FSI Holdings, Inc., 246 S.W.3d 796 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008) (deference to arbitral rules and non-manifest disregard standard)
- In re D. Wilson Constr. Co., 196 S.W.3d 774 (Tex.2006) (contract ambiguity and rule of construction)
- Affiliated Pathologists, P.A. v. McKee, 261 S.W.3d 874 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008) (ambiguity determination and extrinsic evidence limits)
- Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. v. CBI Indus., Inc., 907 S.W.2d 517 (Tex.1995) (extrinsic evidence inadmissible to create ambiguity)