Hudson v. American Arbitration Ass'n

Fifth Circuit

Hudson v. American Arbitration Ass'n

101 F. App'x 947

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 17, 2004

Docket04-30061

StatusUnpublished

This text of 101 F. App'x 947 (Hudson v. American Arbitration Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hudson v. American Arbitration Ass'n, 101 F. App'x 947 (5th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiff John Hudson submitted his ■wrongful termination and defamation claims to arbitration under an agreement with his employer Borg-Warner Protective Services. The arbitrator returned a decision on April 12, 2002. Plaintiff appealed that decision on February 26, 2003. The district court dismissed his claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). We affirm the district court’s dismissal as the relevant statute of limitations provides only three months to appeal from arbitration orders. 9 U.S.C. § 12. As Hudson was appealing an arbitration order rather than a district court order, the district court properly applied § 12 rather than Fed. R. Crv. P. 60(b).

Any equal protection claims against the district court are barred by judicial immunity. Mi reles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991). Any equal protection claims or claims of misdeeds by the American Arbitration Association are barred by arbitral immunity. Hawkins v. Nat’l Ass’n of Sec. Dealers, Inc., 149 F.3d 330, 332 (5th Cir.1998).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiff John Hudson submitted his ■wrongful termination and defamation claims to arbitration under an agreement with his employer Borg-Warner Protective Services. The arbitrator returned a decision on April 12, 2002. Plaintiff appealed that decision on February 26, 2003. The district court dismissed his claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). We affirm the district court’s dismissal as the relevant statute of limitations provides only three months to appeal from arbitration orders. 9 U.S.C. § 12. As Hudson was appealing an arbitration order rather than a district court order, the district court properly applied § 12 rather than Fed. R. Crv. P. 60(b).

Any equal protection claims against the district court are barred by judicial immunity. Mi reles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991). Any equal protection claims or claims of misdeeds by the American Arbitration Association are barred by arbitral immunity. Hawkins v. Nat’l Ass’n of Sec. Dealers, Inc., 149 F.3d 330, 332 (5th Cir.1998).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 F. App'x 947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hudson-v-american-arbitration-assn-ca5-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack