Ally Cat LLC bought a condo from Chauvin, the seller of the unit. A Home Owners Limited Warranty document, containing an arbitration provision, was transferred to Ally Cat. However, the document did not specifically state that the signer of the document had to comply with the terms of the document. The document alternatively meant that the signer (or purchaser of the condo) was simply acknowledging that the document and condo had been received. In other words, under Kentucky law, the document did not qualify as a binding arbitration agreement.
If the document did qualify under Kentucky law, Ally Cat would be forced to resolve disputes through arbitration and Kentucky courts would have jurisdiction to enforce the arbitration. Therefore, when Ally Cat attempted to bring Chauvin to court for damages, how do you think the court resolved the dispute? Did the parties have to settle through arbitration?
Ally Cat LLC., et al, v. Chauvin et al., 274 S.W.3d 451; 2009 Ky. LEXIS 10 (Ky. 2009).