Michael Lavigne v. Mark Addy

Summary

In Lavigne v. Addy, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion to compel arbitration brought by non-signatory top Herbalife distributors against plaintiff distributors. The court held that the top distributors could not invoke the arbitration clauses because they were not parties to the distributor agreements, and equitable estoppel did not apply because the plaintiffs' RICO claims did not rely on the terms of the agreements nor were they inextricably bound up with the agreements' obligations. The court also dismissed the appeal of the venue transfer denial for lack of pendent appellate jurisdiction. The case addresses arbitration agreements, non-signatory rights, and equitable estoppel in class action disputes.

Holdings

1. The top distributors cannot compel arbitration because they are not parties to any arbitration agreement.
2. Equitable estoppel does not apply because the aggrieved distributors did not rely on the terms of the agreements and the alleged misconduct is not founded in or inextricably bound up with the obligations of the agreements.
3. The court lacks jurisdiction because the venue issue is not inextricably intertwined with the arbitration issue.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the top distributors, as non-signatories to the distributor agreements, can compel arbitration of the aggrieved distributors' claims against them.
2. Whether the district court should have applied equitable estoppel to compel arbitration.
3. Whether the court has pendent appellate jurisdiction to review the denial of the motion to transfer venue.

Disposition

affirmed