Mary M. Monteleone, et al. v. CMH Homes, Inc. d/b/a Freedom Homes 650, et al.

Monteleone · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana · May 21, 2026 · No. 26-494

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana considered defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings in a dispute involving alleged mold-related defects in a manufactured home. The court held that the binding dispute resolution agreement was valid and encompassed Mary Monteleone’s claims, and that Katie and William Monteleone’s individual claims were also subject to arbitration under direct-benefits estoppel. The court denied arbitration as to claims brought by Katie and William on behalf of their minor children and stayed the entire case pending arbitration.

Holdings

  1. The binding dispute resolution agreement was valid and enforceable. Mary did not establish that her consent was vitiated by error, and the agreement was not adhesionary.
  2. The broad arbitration agreement encompassed Mary's claims arising from the purchase, ownership, occupancy, design, construction, and alleged defects in the home, so those claims had to be arbitrated.
  3. Katie and William were bound by the arbitration agreement as to their individual claims under Louisiana's direct-benefits-estoppel doctrine.
  4. Katie and William could not bind G.M. and D.M. to the arbitration agreement because Louisiana Civil Code article 3101 requires court authorization before tutors bind minors to arbitration.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Mary's binding dispute resolution agreement was valid under Louisiana contract law despite her assertions of error and adhesion.
  2. Whether the plaintiffs' claims fell within the broad scope of the arbitration agreement.
  3. Whether Katie and William, as nonsignatories, were bound by the arbitration agreement through direct-benefits estoppel.
  4. Whether Katie and William could bind their minor children to arbitration without judicial authorization under Louisiana Civil Code article 3101.
  5. Whether the entire action should be stayed pending arbitration of the arbitrable claims.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (30)

  • Texaco Expl. & Prod. Co. v. AmClyde Engineered Prods. Co., 243 F.3d 906, 909 (5th Cir. 2001)(followed)
  • Dean Witter Reynolds Inc. v. Byrd, 470 U.S. 213, 217 (1985)(followed)
  • In re Hornbeck Offshore (1984) Corp., 981 F.2d 752, 754 (5th Cir. 1993)(followed)
  • Iberia Credit Bureau, Inc. v. Cingular Wireless LLC, 379 F.3d 159, 166 (5th Cir. 2004)(followed)
  • Morgan v. Sundance, Inc., 596 U.S. 411, 418 (2022)(followed)
  • Jones v. Halliburton Co., 583 F.3d 228, 233-34 (5th Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Sherer v. Green Tree Servicing LLC, 548 F.3d 379, 381 (5th Cir. 2008)(followed)
  • Fleetwood Enters., Inc. v. Gaskamp, 280 F.3d 1069, 1073 (5th Cir. 2002)(followed)
  • First Options of Chi., Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938, 944 (1995)(followed)
  • Finta-Volpati v. Volpati, 428 So. 3d 759, 768 (La. App. 2025)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 30.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…