Arbitration & Mediation

Can a Party Execute on a Debt and "Buy" an Arbitration Claim against it as a "Chose in Action"?

By Christopher B. Hopkins, Esq.

Sometimes cases play out like chess games, with each side having their own style and strategy. The game itself turns into a tricks and set-ups designed to distract the opponent in order to expose the queen.

Whether you like the outcome or not, there was some insistent and clever lawyering in the case of David Donan v. Dolce Vita SA, Inc. before the Fourth District (Hazouri, Klein, and Damoorgian).

Dolce sued claiming that Donan breached a contract. An associated lis pendis was deemed improper and Donan obtained an order for approximately $17,000. The main case, by agreed order, was sent to arbitration through the American Arbitration Association. Donan meanwhile moved to execute on the $17k as a "chose in action" claiming the arbitration claim was subject to execution in proceedings supplementary.

Personal tort claims are generally not considered a chose in action but this case appears to be a contract case instead. The statute, Florida Statute 56.29, thus otherwise permits the court to apply the chose to the debt. But isn't it a little odd that the defendant could execute on a debt and essentially buy the arbitration claim against it -- thus presumably dismissing it?

Answer is yes, this would be "inequitable." That said, the Court did not go so far as to necessarily make a new exception, it simply said this was a valid use of judicial discretion to deny the motion at the trial level.

A clever effort and nearly a check-mate.

Full post as published by Florida Arbitration Law on October 13, 2008 (boomark / email).