Carter v. DSW Shoe Warehouse, Inc.
- Philip Halpern
- 7:23-cv-04761
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Carter v. DSW Shoe Warehouse, Judge Halpern compelled arbitration of Carter’s claims and transferred the action to the Eastern District of New York.
Plaintiff Carter must arbitrate his claims, and the action was transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
What happened
Carter v. DSW Shoe Warehouse, Inc. involved DSW’s requests to require Plaintiff Carter to arbitrate his claims and to move the case to another federal court.
The court found that the arbitration agreement’s validity was undisputed and that DSW had not given up its right to arbitration. After that ruling, the court found that the legal factors favored transferring the action to the Eastern District of New York.
Judge Philip M. Halpern granted both motions and directed the Clerk to transfer the action after a seven-day waiting period.
The detailed version
- Carter v. DSW Shoe Warehouse, Inc. · No. 7:23-cv-04761
- Philip Halpern
- Dec. 12, 2023
Background
The court held a telephone conference after DSW Shoe Warehouse, Inc. submitted letters describing two planned motions. The court treated those letters as the motions themselves. One motion sought to compel Plaintiff Carter to arbitrate his claims. The other sought to transfer the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The parties submitted written arguments and presented oral argument.
Rulings
The court granted the motion to compel Plaintiff Carter to arbitrate his claims. It stated that the validity of the arbitration agreement was undisputed and that DSW had not waived its right to arbitrate Carter’s claims.
Because Carter would no longer be a plaintiff in the court action, the court also granted the motion to transfer venue. It concluded that the factors under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) favored transfer to the Eastern District of New York.
Disposition
The court directed the Clerk to transfer the action under Local Civil Rule 83.1, which provides for a seven-day waiting period before the transfer takes effect. The opinion refers to reasons stated on the record and to a transcript, but those materials are not included in the provided text.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.