The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ST. JAMES PARISH CIVIL ACTION
SCHOOL BOARD
VERSUS NO. 23-6638
CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS
AT LLOYD’S, ET AL. SECTION “O”
ORDER
Before the Court is the motion1 of Defendants to compel arbitration and stay
this litigation under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Arbitral Awards. See 9 U.S.C. § 206. Defendants contend that the Court should
compel arbitration because Plaintiff’s claims are subject to an arbitration provision
in Insurance Policy/Account No. 848577 (the “Account Policy”), and because the
Account Policy’s arbitration provision in turn falls under the Convention on the
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.2 Plaintiff “does not oppose
the motion and agrees” to an order staying this case pending arbitration.3
1 ECF No. 6.
2 ECF No. 6-1 at 1–2.
3 ECF No. 9 at 1.
“The Convention is an international treaty that provides citizens of signatory
countries the right to enforce arbitration agreements.” Bufkin Enters., L.L.C. v.
Indian Harbor Ins. Co., No. 23-30171, —F.4th—, 2024 WL 1262225, at *3 (5th Cir.
Mar. 26, 2024) (per curiam). “Its purpose is ‘to encourage the recognition and
enforcement of commercial arbitration agreements in international contracts and to
unify the standards by which agreements to arbitrate are observed and arbitral
awards are enforced in signatory countries.’” Id. (quoting Scherk v. Alberto-Culver
Co., 417 U.S. 506, 520 n.15 (1974)). The Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) “codifies the
Convention, providing that it ‘shall be enforced in United States courts in accordance
with [the FAA’s terms].’” Id. (brackets in original) (quoting 9 U.S.C. § 201).
“In determining whether the Convention requires compelling arbitration in a
given case, courts conduct only a very limited inquiry.” Id. (internal citation and
quotation marks omitted). “[A] court should compel arbitration if (1) there is a written
agreement to arbitrate the matter; (2) the agreement provides for arbitration in a
convention signatory nation; (3) the agreement arises out of a commercial legal
relationship; and (4) a party to the agreement is not an American citizen.” Id.
(brackets in original) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). “Once these
factors are met, a district court must order arbitration unless it finds that the
[arbitration] agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed.”
Id. (brackets in original) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).
Each factor is met here. The first factor is met because the Account Policy
contains a written agreement to arbitrate “[a]ll matters in difference . . . in relation
to” the Account Policy.4 See id. The second factor is met because the Account Policy’s
arbitration agreement provides for arbitration in New York,5 “which is located in a
Convention signatory nation.” Id. The third factor is met because the Account Policy’s
arbitration agreement arises out of an insurance contract, which is a commercial legal
relationship. See, e.g., id. (concluding the third factor was met in arbitration
agreement contained in insurance policy). And the fourth and final factor is met
because non-American citizen insurers, including Lloyd’s of London Syndicates 2987
and 510, are parties to the Account Policy’s arbitration agreement.6 See id.
Because all four factors are met, the Court “must order arbitration unless it
finds that the [arbitration] agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of
being performed.” Id. (brackets in original) (internal citation and quotation marks
omitted). No party contends that the Account Policy’s arbitration agreement is null
and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed. The Court therefore finds that
the arbitration agreement in the Account Policy is not “null and void, inoperative or
incapable of being performed.” Id. (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).
4 ECF No. 6-2 at 7.
5 Id.
6 Id. at 6.
In sum, the Court concludes that the Convention requires compelling
arbitration here because each of the four relevant factors is met, and the arbitration
agreement in the Account Policy is not “null and void, inoperative or incapable of
being performed.” Jd. (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Defendants to compel arbitration and
stay proceedings is GRANTED. Plaintiff and Defendants are compelled to arbitrate
in accordance with the terms of the arbitration agreement contained in the Account
Policy. This action is stayed pending arbitration. The Clerk’s Office is respectfully
directed to close this case for administrative and statistical purposes.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 1st day of April, 2024.
Bi. 6.2
BRANDON S. LONG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE