Hansen v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.
This text of 408 So. 2d 658 (Hansen v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
William M. HANSEN, Petitioner,
v.
DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS, INC. and Phillip Pauze, Respondents.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
*659 Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Strickroot and Curtis Carlson, Miami, for petitioner.
Smathers & Thompson and Hugh J. Turner, Jr., Miami, for respondents.
Before SCHWARTZ, BASKIN and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
BASKIN, Judge.
By Petition for Writ of Certiorari, William M. Hansen challenges a trial court order which stayed proceedings and compelled him to arbitrate his claims against a securities brokerage firm and one of its employees for negligence and fraud in options transactions. Certiorari is the appropriate method of review. Vic Potamkin Chevrolet, Inc. v. Bloom, 386 So.2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). We hold that respondents, by answering the complaint without demanding arbitration, waived their rights, Lapidus v. Arlen Beach Condominium Association, Inc., 394 So.2d 1102 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); King v. Thompson & McKinnon, Auchincloss Kohlmeyer, Inc., 352 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); their conduct was inconsistent with the exercise of a right to arbitrate, Roberts Construction Co. v. Masters & Company, Inc., 403 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), even though they asserted Hansen's failure to arbitrate as an affirmative defense. We hold, therefore, that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law, and we quash the order pertaining to arbitration.
Our decision renders it unnecessary for us to review the enforceability of the arbitration clauses contained in the Customer's Agreement and Options Trading Agreement, both of which provide that New York law governs.
For these reasons, we grant Petition for Writ of Certiorari and quash the order compelling arbitration. We remand the cause for further proceedings.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
408 So. 2d 658, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 22089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hansen-v-dean-witter-reynolds-inc-fladistctapp-1981.