NCR Credit Corp. v. Park Rapids Leasing Associates

349 N.W.2d 867, 1984 Minn. App. LEXIS 3262
CourtCourt of Appeals of Minnesota
DecidedJune 26, 1984
DocketC7-84-408
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 349 N.W.2d 867 (NCR Credit Corp. v. Park Rapids Leasing Associates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
NCR Credit Corp. v. Park Rapids Leasing Associates, 349 N.W.2d 867, 1984 Minn. App. LEXIS 3262 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

OPINION

SEDGWICK, Judge.

Appellant appeals the trial court’s denial of its motion to dismiss or stay a third-party action pending arbitration. We affirm.

FACTS

Appellant is NCR Corporation, the third-party defendant below. Plaintiff is NCR Credit Corporation, a wholly owned and controlled subsidiary of NCR Corporation and assignee of the contract that is the subject of this lawsuit. Respondent Park Rapids Leasing Associates is a partnership comprised of several doctors employed by the Park Rapids-Walker Clinics, Ltd.

NCR Credit Corporation commenced this lawsuit to collect $72,279.33 allegedly due under the terms of a lease between NCR and Park Rapids Leasing Associates whereby NCR agreed to supply equipment and programs necessary to operate a computer system at the Park Rapids and Walker Clinics and respondent agreed to monthly payments over a five year period. After making the first payment, respondent *868 stopped further payment, ceased use of all equipment, and advised NCR to pick up the equipment. Respondent contends that NCR Corporation, with intent to deceive, made fraudulent and false representations about the capabilities of the computer system which induced them to enter into the lease. Appellant demands arbitration.

ISSUE

Did the lease between the parties include fraud in the inducement of the agreement as a subject of arbitration?

ANALYSIS

NCR drafted its “Universal Agreement” including the following arbitration clause:

DISPUTES — Any controversy or claim, including any claim of misrepresentation, arising out of or related to this Agreement and/or any contract hereafter entered into between NCR and Customer or the breach thereof, or the furnishing of any equipment or service by NCR to Customer, shall be settled by arbitration. The arbitration shall be conducted by a single arbitrator under the then current rules of the American Arbitration Association. The arbitrator shall be chosen from a panel of persons knowledgeable in business information and data processing systems. The decision and award of the arbitrator shall be final and binding and the award so rendered may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. The arbitration shall be held and the award shall be deemed to be made in the city where the NCR district office procuring the order is located.

Respondent alleges a tort committed by NCR Corporation in fraudulently inducing it to enter the contract. The above language does not cover conduct pri- or to the agreement. Absent language evincing a clear intent by the parties to arbitrate the issue of “fraud in the inducement,” the issue is for the court to decide as a matter of law. Atcas v. Credit Clearing Corp. of America, 292 Minn. 334, 197 N.W.2d 448 (1972).

Furthermore, the conduct of a party in starting a lawsuit in the face of an arbitration clause is a waiver of the right to arbitrate. Independent School Dist. No. 35 v. A. Hedenberg & Co., 214 Minn. 82, 7 N.W.2d 511 (1943). Here NCR Credit Corporation started the lawsuit for collection purposes and elected state court action in lieu of arbitration.

DECISION

The decision of the trial court is affirmed.

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

Related

Hughes v. Lund
603 N.W.2d 674 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 1999)
Hayes Children Leasing Co. v. NCR Corp.
37 Cal. App. 4th 775 (California Court of Appeal, 1995)
Michael-Curry Companies v. Knutson Shareholders Liquidating Trust
434 N.W.2d 671 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
349 N.W.2d 867, 1984 Minn. App. LEXIS 3262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ncr-credit-corp-v-park-rapids-leasing-associates-minnctapp-1984.