Schiffer v. Slomin's, Inc., 48 Misc. 3d 15

Small claims action arising from a contractual arrangement for security system installation and monitoring services.
Plaintiffs Schiffer and Raviv sought $5,000, asserting breach of contract, credit card fraud, property damage, and failure to provide proper goods/services.
Defendant moved to dismiss Raviv’s claims (alleged no contract with Raviv) and to stay Schiffer’s claims and compel arbitration.
Plaintiffs claimed Raviv was a party to the contract via authorization to charge his credit card; Raviv claimed no contract with defendant and that arbitration was improper.
District Court initially denied the motion to compel arbitration for Raviv and Schiffer; later, the court found insufficient nexus with interstate commerce to trigger the FAA for Raviv.
Appellate modification allowed arbitration for Schiffer, severed Schiffer’s claims from Raviv’s, and affirmed the order as modified.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the FAA preempt GBL 399-c to compel arbitration for Schiffer?	Schiffer—FAA governs; nexus with interstate commerce suffices.	GBL 399-c remains applicable; no FAA preemption shown.	Yes; arbitration for Schiffer granted.
Is Raviv bound by the arbitration provision?	Raviv signed payment authorization; intended as party to contract.	Raviv not named as buyer/subscriber; not bound.	Raviv not bound; arbitration not compelled.
Should Schiffer’s and Raviv’s claims be severed?	Severance needed to resolve arbitration vs. non-arbitrable claims.	Severance unnecessary.	Yes; Schiffer’s claims severed from Raviv’s.

Byrnes v Castaldi, 72 AD3d 718 (2010) (homeowner-service contracts fall under GBL 399-c)
Ragucci v Professional Constr. Servs., 25 AD3d 43 (2005) (GBL 399-c applicability to arbitration clauses)
Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos. v Dobson, 513 U.S. 265 (1995) (FAA preempts state law prohibiting arbitration when nexus to interstate commerce exists)