Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:20-cv-03880
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC, Judge Ramos granted a stay so the parties could pursue arbitration of the wage-and-hour case.
The plaintiff and defendants in the wage-and-hour case must proceed with arbitration and later provide the court with a status update.
What happened
Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC is a wage-and-hour case in which the plaintiff asked the court to pause the case while arbitration proceeded. The plaintiff’s counsel said defendants’ counsel had identified an arbitration agreement after the complaint was filed, although the plaintiff did not concede that the agreement applied.
The parties agreed to pursue resolution through arbitration rather than litigate the agreement’s enforceability in court. Defense counsel preferred dismissal instead of a stay, but the plaintiff’s counsel argued that courts in the Second Circuit should keep cases open during arbitration because courts may later need to assist with the arbitration process.
Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the application to stay the case pending arbitration. He directed the parties to provide a status update within 48 hours after the arbitration ends.
The detailed version
- Brittle v. Netamorphosis, LLC · No. 1:20-cv-03880
- Edgardo Ramos
- June 17, 2020
Background
The plaintiff’s counsel described the case as a wage-and-hour matter. After the complaint was filed, counsel for the defendants, who had not yet appeared in the case, advised the plaintiff’s counsel that the parties had an arbitration agreement. The plaintiff’s counsel stated that the parties agreed to pursue resolution through arbitration without litigating the agreement’s enforceability and without conceding that the agreement applied.
Application to Stay
The plaintiff requested a stay, meaning a pause, under Section 3 of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3. The request covered the case and all pertinent deadlines while arbitration was pending. The defendants preferred dismissal rather than a stay.
The plaintiff’s counsel cited Second Circuit authority stating that courts can have an ancillary, or supporting, role during arbitration. The letter identified possible judicial functions including appointing or replacing an arbitrator, enforcing an arbitrator’s witness subpoena, addressing contempt, confirming, vacating, or modifying an arbitration award, and providing a remedy if a party defaults during arbitration.
Ruling
Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the application to stay the case pending arbitration. The parties were directed to give the court a status update within 48 hours after the arbitration proceeding concludes. The order did not decide whether the arbitration agreement is enforceable or whether it applies to the dispute.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.