Ex Parte Gray
Ex Parte Gray
Opinion
Duane Gray petitions for a writ of mandamus directing the Jefferson County Circuit Court to vacate its order staying his action against Crown Pontiac, Inc., and Crown's salesman, Shannon Pardue, pending arbitration. Specifically, Gray contends that because Pardue was not a signatory to the contract containing the arbitration agreement, he had no standing to compel Gray to arbitrate.
Gray argues that a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute he has not agreed to submit, citingEx parte Stallings Sons, Inc.,
The arbitration agreement included in the "Retail Buyer's Order" that Gray signed reads as follows:
"I hereby acknowledge and agree that all disputes and controversies of every kind and nature between myself and Crown Pontiac Nissan, Inc., arising out of or in connection with the purchase of this vehicle by me, will be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the procedure set forth in this Retail Buyer's Order."
As the trial court noted in its order compelling arbitration, the thrust of Gray's complaint against Crown and Pardue is that Pardue, as Crown's agent, while acting within the line and scope of his agency, falsely represented the condition of the vehicle Gray was buying. Clearly, Gray's claim comes within the arbitration agreement, and that agreement is binding upon all the parties and is enforceable under the controlling law. SeeEx parte Gates,
Gray has not carried the burden of proof imposed on one petitioning for the writ of mandamus; therefore, the petition is denied.
WRIT DENIED.
HOOPER, C.J., and MADDOX, HOUSTON, COOK, and BUTTS, JJ., concur. *Page 252
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Ex Parte Duane Gray (Re Duane Gray v. Crown Pontiac, Inc.).
- Cited By
- 40 cases
- Status
- Published