Search for Arbitration Attorneys or Arbitrators

Enter a city and state

Learn about Arbitration

Arbitration Topics
VIEW MORE >>

What's New at Arbitration.com

VIEW MORE >>

About Arbitration.com -

When you just can't come to an agreement, court isn't the only answer. Arbitration is an out-of-court means of dispute resolution. When parties have a disagreement, the 'arbitrator' or 'arbiter' is a neutral third-party that reviews the case to determine what action should be taken, and will determine the terms under which the dispute will be settled. The decision of the arbitrator is final, and may be legally binding or non-binding.

If you have a dispute with your employer or over a commercial contract, it is likely that arbitration is mandatory to resolve any issues. Being an easier means than taking anyone to court, arbitration is often required for resolving disputes within a company and is most often used in settling commercial disputes. Does arbitration sound like your solution? Get started today – find the arbitration attorney or arbitrator you need in any specialty, in any state.


 

Arbitration News

Article Image

A judge in the Western District of the State of Pennsylvania has denied a subsidiary of Citigroup their bid to compel arbitration in a dispute over a life insurance policy.  U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert C.  Mitchell found that the arbitration clauses cited by Citigroup in the matter do not directly apply to the specific life insurance policy cited in the dispute, and thus cannot be applied.

 

The suit was brought by Karen Bucher who, along with her late husband, took out a mortgage with CitiFinancial in 2005.  CitiFinancial advised the couple to also take out a life insurance policy on her husband, Clarence, which the Bucher's did in the amount of $100,000.  The Buchers continued to work with CitiFinancial, taking out a second mortgage in 2007 as well as buying other financial products.  CitiFinancial also advised the couple not to refinance their 2005 mortgage because it would cause them to lose the life insurance policy they had purchased.

 

When Clarence Bucher passed away in 2013, Karen discovered the insurance policy had been canceled without her knowledge.  She filed suit, and the defendants moved to compel arbitration, citing binding arbitration agreements in several of the loans and other products purchased.  However, since the life insurance policy itself did not include such language, the motions have been denied and Mrs. Bucher is free to pursue her suit in court.  The court found that binding arbitration agreements must be specifically and overly included in the actual contract under dispute, not referencing other notes or documents.