Pre-Paid Legal Serv., Inc., et al. v. Battle, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-01669-SCT Linked Case(s): 2002-CA-01669-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-01-2004 Opinion Author: Carlson, J. Holding: Affirmed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Pre-paid legal expense agreement - Section 83-49-13(2)(f) - Arbitration Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller, P.J., Easley, Graves and Dickinson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : Cobb, P.J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-19-2002 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Tomie Green Disposition: Granted the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and denied the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Case Number: 251-02-270 CIV |
|
| Note: | Appellants' Motion to Strike is granted. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc., Brooks Werkheiser, Dyre Law Firm, PLLC and Arnold D. Dyre |
RICHARD L. JONES
ROBERT L. GIBBS
ANNIE C. SANDERS
ANDREA LA'VERNE FORD EDNEY
TESELYN AFRIQUE MELTON
EARNEST G. TAYLOR
JOHN BENTON CLARK
SHANDA L. LEWIS
C. MICHAEL ELLINGBURG |
||
| Appellee: | Samuel Battle, Reginald Burks, Myrtis Hollis, James Robinson, Bennie Irvin, Mary Keeler, Willie McKenny, Renata L. Miller, David Mills, Eric Norwood, Geneva Shelby, Shemekia Shelby, Pastella Spratley, George Williams, Leonard Boddie, John C. Burwell, Angela Hudnall, Minnie Mosely, Caroline Smith, Thelma Louise Smith, Jimmy Grant, Sylvia Grant, Tony Barfield, Mary Honeysuckle, Lonedell Nicholson, Patricia Whitfield, Charles Alexander, Kenneth M. Crook and Beverly Thompson | J. BRAD PIGOTT J. DOUGLAS MINOR BARRY W. GILMER |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Contract - Pre-paid legal expense agreement - Section 83-49-13(2)(f) - Arbitration |
| Summary of the Facts: | National Pre-Paid Legal Services of Mississippi, Inc. offered contracts for legal expense insurance to individuals for a monthly fee. National, in turn, has contracted with Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation, to provide administrative services for National. This action was brought in Hinds County Circuit Court by twenty-nine plaintiffs who entered into contracts with National. Named as defendants were Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc., Harlan C. Stonecipher, Brooks Werkheiser, Dyre Law Firm, PLLC, and Arnold D. Dyre. The plaintiffs asserted the following causes of action: violation of Mississippi Deceptive Advertising Statute; tort of deceit; tort of civil conspiracy; tort of professional negligence; tort of negligent misrepresentation; breach of fiduciary duty; illegal payments to the Dyre defendants; fraudulent inducement of sales contract; and declaratory judgment that their claims are not subject to arbitration. The defendants filed suit in the U.S. District Court alleging this matter posed a federal question under the Federal Arbitration Act and requesting a stay in the state court action pending the outcome of the federal court action. The circuit court refused to impose a stay and granted the plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and denied the defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. The defendants appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The issue is whether the language contained in the pre-paid legal services plan constitutes a binding arbitration provision. In section 83-49-13(2)(f), the statute permitting pre-paid legal expense agreements, the Legislature has required that entities selling legal expense insurance contain a statement describing a procedure for settling disputes between or among the sponsor, participating or staff attorneys, and the subscribers. The provision in the pre-paid legal expense agreement at issue provides that “[i]n the event of a dispute, the parties will agree on an impartial attorney who will decide such dispute and that decision will be binding on all parties to such dispute.” Arbitration is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit. In this case, the plaintiffs signed only the application, which did not contain an arbitration provision. There was no notice, no discussion, and no negotiation of the arbitration agreement. Based on the language in the clause, an average citizen would not realize that he or she is giving up his or her right to a trial by jury under the broad, general language contained in the pre-paid legal expense agreement. Also, the purported arbitration provision is contradicted because the contract also contemplates a lawsuit being filed by either National or the plaintiffs. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
