A.G. EDWARDS & SONS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS IN FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
SCOTT B. BING AND MARY ELLEN BING, HIS WIFE, ALBERT P. MCGARITY, LINDA G. ZINGLE, DAVID W. THOMPSON AND KATHRYN D. THOMPSON, HIS WIFE, RESPONDENTS
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Conversion Of Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
HERSEY, Judge.
The parties (except two) entered into agreements containing arbitration clauses. Respondents argue and the trial court found (as we assume from the result) that the particular issue in controversy involves conversion of funds, a matter not covered by the arbitration clauses. Because we find that the questioned transactions are inextricably interwoven with respondents’ employment and the contracts controlling employment and having determined that petitioner’s pleading in the trial court did not constitute a waiver of the right to arbitration, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, reverse the order of March 9, 1983, and remand this cause for the entry of an order requiring that the issues be submitted to arbitration. See Raymond, James & Assoc., Inc. v. Maves, 384 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980).
CERTIORARI GRANTED.
LETTS and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Est. Of Mark Daniel Zimbrick v. Zimbrick, 453 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…KSTEIN, DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur. BERANEK, J., dissents as to opinion and concurs in result only with opinion, in which HERSEY, J., concurs. . We considered receding from Urbanek and Tri-State in Florida Coast Bank of Pompano Beach v. Kimmett, 446 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), but decided to await a case which framed the issue more clearly. . The order on appeal was entered in an adversary probate proceeding, see Rule 5.025(a)(2), Fla.R.P. & G.P., and, thus, the Rules of Civil Procedure govern. See R…
-
Bing v. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc., 498 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…GLICKSTEIN, Judge. This is a third appearance of this case before the court; and the parties are still at the starting line or lines. The first was A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. v. Bing, 446 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), rev. denied, 447 So. 2d 885 (Fla.1984), which explains itself. The second, Case No. 85-124, resulted in a pro forma order, denying certio-rari. The issue before the court in that instance, whether or not to grant certiorari, aro…
-
Pozo v. Roadhouse Grill, Inc., 790 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…olding is distinguishable from the instant case because Roadhouse is not alleging that Pozo was a third party beneficiary of the contract, but rather, had a “close relationship” with one of the parties. The case of A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc. v. Bing, 446 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), is also distinguishable. That case held that the parties to an arbitration agreement were compelled to arbitrate a claim for conversion of funds, a matter not covered by the arbitration agreement, because that claim was inextric…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Raymond v. Vallery V. Maves and Ethel Pryor Maves, 384 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)