Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided June 17, 2020·No. 1:20-cv-03880·Unknown

Opinion

DOD PC, MEMO ENDORSED June 17, 2020 The application to stay the case pending arbitration is GRANTED. The parties are directed to provide the Court Hon. Edgardo Ramos with a status update within forty-eight hours of the United States District Court conclusion of the arbitration proceeding. Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square, Room 2102 ae () New York, NY 10007 Edgardo Ramos, U.S.D.J Dated: June 17, 2020 Via Eur New York, New York Re: Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC et al.; 1:20-cv-03880 Motion to Stay Case Pending Arbitration Your Honor:

We represent the plaintiff in the above-described wage and hour matter. Pursuant to FAA §3 (9 U.S.C. §3), we write to request that the Court stay this case and all pertinent deadlines pending the outcome of arbitration in this case.

After the plaintitt filed her complaint in this matter, counsel for the defendants (who have not yet appeared before this Court) advised us of the existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties. Rather than litigate the enforceability of this agreement, and without conceding the applicability of the agreement, we have agreed to pursue resolution of this case through arbitration.

Counsel for defendants have indicated that they would prefer this case be dismissed instead of stayed. However, pursuant to Katz v. Cellco Partnership, dba Verizon Wireless, 2015 WL 4528658 (2d Cir. July 28, 2015), courts have a potentially important ancillary role in arbitration cases. The Katz court wrote, “judicial participation in the arbitral process is permitted” — i.e., (i) to resolve disputes regarding the appointment of an arbitrator or to fill an arbitrator vacancy, 9 U.S.C. §5; (ii) to compel the attendance of witnesses (i.e., to enforce an arbitrator's subpoena) or to punish a witness for contempt, id. §7; and (iii) to confirm or vacate or modify an arbitral award, id. §§9-11. Courts can also provide a remedy if a party defaults in the course of arbitration. See Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc. v. Cahill, 2015 WL 3372136 (10th Cir. May 26, 2015). Courts in the Second Circuit should therefore stay cases pending the result of arbitration rather than dismissing them.

We thank the Court for its attention to this matter.

Sincerely, |? Dalen Penn Dodson, Esq. penn@andersondodson.com

ANDERSONDODSON, P.C. 11 BROADWAY * SUITE 615 * NEW YORK, NY 10004 (212) 961-7639 TEL * (646) 998-8051 FAX www.ANDERSONDODSON.com

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC, (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC (Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc. v. Cahill
786 F.3d 1287 (Tenth Circuit, 2015)
Katz v. Cellco Partnership
794 F.3d 341 (Second Circuit, 2015)