Lopez v. Home Buyers Warranty Corp.
Decision Date | 03 November 1995 |
Parties | Juliette G. LOPEZ v. HOME BUYERS WARRANTY CORPORATION, et al. 1920330. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court (CV-91-897); Joseph D. Phelps, Judge.
Jere L. Beasley and J. Cole Portis of Beasley, Wilson, Allen, Main & Crow, P.C., Montgomery, for appellant.
Philip S. Gidiere, Jr. of Carpenter & Gidiere, Montgomery, for appellees.
On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States
The issue presented on this remand from the Supreme Court of the United States is whether the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. §§ 1-15 (1982), requires arbitration of the claims at issue. The original opinion of this Court is published at 628 So.2d 361 (Ala.1993). In it, this Court treated Juliette Lopez's "appeal" from the trial court's order compelling arbitration as a petition for a writ of mandamus and granted the writ:
628 So.2d at 362. The essential facts of this case are set out in the original opinion as follows:
Under Alabama law, the specific enforcement of a predispute arbitration agreement violates both our statutory law and public policy, unless federal law preempts state law. § 8-1-41(3), Ala.Code 1975; Wells v. Mobile County Bd. of Realtors, Inc., 387 So.2d 140, 144 (Ala.1980); Bozeman v. Gilbert, 1 Ala. 90, 91 (1840); Lopez v. Home Buyers, supra, at 363. In its first opinion in this case, this Court determined that in this case federal law did not preempt our law and public policy against enforcement of predispute agreements to arbitrate, because we could find no evidence that the parties "contemplated substantial interstate activity" when they entered into the warranty contract. We held that under the "contemplation" test, 1 Mrs. Lopez was not required to submit her warranty claims against Home Buyers to arbitration:
The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment of this Court and remanded the case for further consideration in light of its opinion in Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. ----, ----, 115 S.Ct. 834, 837, 130 L.Ed.2d 753 (1995). Home Buyers Warranty Corp. II v. Lopez, 513 U.S. ----, ----, 115 S.Ct. 930, ----, 130 L.Ed.2d 876 (1995). The cause has been submitted on the order of remand and on the original briefs. 2
In Allied-Bruce Terminix, supra, the United States Supreme Court rejected the "contemplation" test followed by this Court, writing:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Southern Energy Homes, Inc. v. Lee
...U.S. 265, 115 S.Ct. 834, 130 L.Ed.2d 753 (1995); Hurst v. Tony Moore Imports, Inc., 699 So.2d 1249 (Ala.1997); Lopez v. Home Buyers Warranty Corp., 670 So.2d 35 (Ala. 1995); Jim Burke Automotive, Inc. v. Beavers, 674 So.2d 1260 (Ala.1995). Any principled approach to resolving arbitration is......
-
Robert Frank McAlpine Architecture, Inc. v. Heilpern
...agreement is barred by both Alabama's statutory law and its public policy, unless federal law preempts them. Lopez v. Home Buyers Warranty Corp., 670 So.2d 35 (Ala.1995). But see Article IV, § 84, Constitution of Alabama of 1901 (called to the author's attention on March 24, 1998, by Associ......
-
Hurst v. Tony Moore Imports, Inc.
...arbitration agreement violates both our statutory law and our public policy, unless federal law preempts them. Lopez v. Home Buyers Warranty Corp., 670 So.2d 35 (Ala.1995). The Federal Arbitration Act preempts contrary state law and, thus, renders enforceable a predispute arbitration agreem......
-
Nat'l Home Ins. Co. v. Bridges
...the submission and adjustment of warranty claims required correspondence through Alabama, Georgia, and Colorado. Lopez v. Home Buyers Warranty Corp., 670 So.2d 35, 38 (Ala.1995). Other courts have likewise held that the arbitration agreement in the HBW Warranty is governed by and enforceabl......