Ward v. Youth Villages, Inc.

W.D. Tennessee

Ward v. Youth Villages, Inc.

DecidedAugust 21, 2025

Docket2:25-cv-02752

StatusUnknown

This text of Ward v. Youth Villages, Inc. (Ward v. Youth Villages, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ward v. Youth Villages, Inc., (W.D. Tenn. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION ARIELLE WARD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 2:25-cv-02752-SHL-tmp ) YOUTH VILLAGES, INC. and OZELL ) PACE, JR., ) Defendants. )

ORDER GRANTING YOUTH VILLAGES, INC.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS PENDING ARBITRATION

Before the Court is Youth Villages, Inc.’s Unopposed Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Arbitration, filed August 19, 2025. (ECF No. 10.) In the Motion, Defendant Youth Villages, Inc. seeks entry of an order to stay the proceedings in this matter pending the Parties’ submission of the case to arbitration, pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 3. (Id. at PageID 82.) Youth Villages states that Plaintiff Arielle Ward does not oppose the Motion, although Ward reserves the right to amend her complaint.1 (Id. at PageID 84.) Ward’s complaint alleges negligence, battery, retaliation, harassment, discrimination, and other claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Opportunity Act, and the Tennessee Human Rights Act. (ECF No. 1-1 at PageID 7–8.) Youth Villages informed Ward of its intent to compel arbitration of these claims, pursuant to the arbitration agreement executed by the Parties upon Ward’s acceptance of Youth Village’s

1 Because Youth Villages has not yet filed an answer, Ward retains the right to amend the complaint until “21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Thus, the Court need not address Ward’s requested reservation of right to amend her complaint. employment offer in September 2023. (ECF Nos. 10 at PageID 83; 1-1 at PageID 8.) When, as here, “a lawsuit involves an arbitrable dispute, and a party requests a stay pending arbitration, § 3 of the FAA compels the court to stay the proceeding.” Smith v. Spizzirri, 601 U.S. 472, 478 (2024). Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED. This matter is

stayed pending the resolution of the Parties’ arbitration. The Parties are ORDERED to provide a status report on the arbitration every six months, with the first report due on February 23, 2026. In addition, the Parties shall notify the Court within fourteen days after the arbitration is complete. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 21st day of August, 2025. s/ Sheryl H. Lipman SHERYL H. LIPMAN CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION ARIELLE WARD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 2:25-cv-02752-SHL-tmp ) YOUTH VILLAGES, INC. and OZELL ) PACE, JR., ) Defendants. )

ORDER GRANTING YOUTH VILLAGES, INC.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS PENDING ARBITRATION

Before the Court is Youth Villages, Inc.’s Unopposed Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Arbitration, filed August 19, 2025. (ECF No. 10.) In the Motion, Defendant Youth Villages, Inc. seeks entry of an order to stay the proceedings in this matter pending the Parties’ submission of the case to arbitration, pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 3. (Id. at PageID 82.) Youth Villages states that Plaintiff Arielle Ward does not oppose the Motion, although Ward reserves the right to amend her complaint.1 (Id. at PageID 84.) Ward’s complaint alleges negligence, battery, retaliation, harassment, discrimination, and other claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Opportunity Act, and the Tennessee Human Rights Act. (ECF No. 1-1 at PageID 7–8.) Youth Villages informed Ward of its intent to compel arbitration of these claims, pursuant to the arbitration agreement executed by the Parties upon Ward’s acceptance of Youth Village’s

1 Because Youth Villages has not yet filed an answer, Ward retains the right to amend the complaint until “21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Thus, the Court need not address Ward’s requested reservation of right to amend her complaint. employment offer in September 2023. (ECF Nos. 10 at PageID 83; 1-1 at PageID 8.) When, as here, “a lawsuit involves an arbitrable dispute, and a party requests a stay pending arbitration, § 3 of the FAA compels the court to stay the proceeding.” Smith v. Spizzirri, 601 U.S. 472, 478 (2024). Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED. This matter is

stayed pending the resolution of the Parties’ arbitration. The Parties are ORDERED to provide a status report on the arbitration every six months, with the first report due on February 23, 2026. In addition, the Parties shall notify the Court within fourteen days after the arbitration is complete. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 21st day of August, 2025. s/ Sheryl H. Lipman SHERYL H. LIPMAN CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ward v. Youth Villages, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ward-v-youth-villages-inc-tnwd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack