scope of the arbitration clause in Pennsylvania

1996Given the broad scope of authority given the arbitrators, we have little difficulty in concluding that the dispute herein is a matter specifically within the scope of the arbitration clause.” Id. at 549 , 574 A.2d at 583 . (citation omitted) Although Brennan and its progeny are helpful in defining the scope of arbitration clauses in underinsurance policies those cases are only partially helpful in resolving this case.

1996Given the broad scope of authority given the arbitrators, we have little difficulty in concluding that the dispute herein is a matter specifically within the scope of the arbitration clause.” Id. at 549 , 574 A.2d at 583 . (citation omitted) Although Brennan and its progeny are helpful in defining the scope of arbitration clauses in underinsurance policies those cases are only partially helpful in resolving this case.

2026See Hade, 503 A.2d at 983 (noting that the term “‘[i]rregularity’ refers not to the award itself, but to the process used in arriving at the award” and that “a finding that the panel considered an issue beyond the scope of the arbitration clause would support a modification of the award on appeal.”).

1988In Hade v. Nationwide Insurance Company, 349 Pa. Super. 541 , 503 A.2d 980 (1986), overruled on other grounds, Ostroff v. Keystone Insurance Company, 357 Pa. Super. 109 , 515 A.2d 584 (1986), the court stated that a finding that an arbitration panel considered an issue beyond the scope of the arbitration clause would support a modification of the award on appeal from the árbi-trators’ decision.

2022In Midomo Co., the arbitration clause did not even cover all claims arising under the parties’ agreement and the Court held that the arbitration clause did not apply to tort claims because it expressly limited arbitration to disputes regarding specific aspects of the parties’ agreement. 739 A.2d at 187-90 . - 13 - J-A22036-22 Because the Equipment Lease and Transportation Agreement requires that the parties arbitrate any “controversy or claim [that] arises out of or relates to this Agreement or operations pursuant to this Agreement” and Plaintiff alleges that his personal injury claims against

2022In Midomo Co., the arbitration clause did not even cover all claims arising under the parties’ agreement and the Court held that the arbitration clause did not apply to tort claims because it expressly limited arbitration to disputes regarding specific aspects of the parties’ agreement. 739 A.2d at 187-90 . - 13 - J-A22036-22 Because the Equipment Lease and Transportation Agreement requires that the parties arbitrate any “controversy or claim [that] arises out of or relates to this Agreement or operations pursuant to this Agreement” and Plaintiff alleges that his personal injury claims against

2025See Setlock, 56 A.3d at 907 .

2008See Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 83 , 123 S.Ct. 588, 591 (2002) (“The question whether the parties have submitted a particular dispute to arbitration, i.e., the ‘question of arbitrability, ’is ‘an issue for judicial determination [ujnless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise.’ AT&T Technologies Inc. v. Communications Workers, 475 U.S. 643, 649 , 106 S.Ct. 1415 , 89 L.Ed.2d 648 (1986) (emphasis added).”).

2008See Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 83 , 123 S.Ct. 588, 591 (2002) (“The question whether the parties have submitted a particular dispute to arbitration, i.e., the ‘question of arbitrability, ’is ‘an issue for judicial determination [ujnless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise.’ AT&T Technologies Inc. v. Communications Workers, 475 U.S. 643, 649 , 106 S.Ct. 1415 , 89 L.Ed.2d 648 (1986) (emphasis added).”).

2008See Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 83 , 123 S.Ct. 588, 591 (2002) (“The question whether the parties have submitted a particular dispute to arbitration, i.e., the ‘question of arbitrability, ’is ‘an issue for judicial determination [ujnless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise.’ AT&T Technologies Inc. v. Communications Workers, 475 U.S. 643, 649 , 106 S.Ct. 1415 , 89 L.Ed.2d 648 (1986) (emphasis added).”).

2008See Howsam v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., 537 U.S. 79, 83 , 123 S.Ct. 588, 591 (2002) (“The question whether the parties have submitted a particular dispute to arbitration, i.e., the ‘question of arbitrability, ’is ‘an issue for judicial determination [ujnless the parties clearly and unmistakably provide otherwise.’ AT&T Technologies Inc. v. Communications Workers, 475 U.S. 643, 649 , 106 S.Ct. 1415 , 89 L.Ed.2d 648 (1986) (emphasis added).”).

2006See Schantz v. Gary Barbera Dodgeland, 830 A.2d 1265 (Pa.Super.2003) (appeal quashed because order directing arbitration was not final order).

2003Liddle v. Scholze, 768 A.2d 1183, 1185 (Pa.Super.2001). ¶ 4 Instantly, there is no dispute that the asserted contractual claims are covered by the scope of the arbitration clause. 2 The critical question here concerns whether all such claims must be arbitrated upon demand or are merely permissive in nature.

2003Id. at 850-851. ¶ 11 In the instant case, the trial court ordered the matter to proceed to arbitration.

2002Id. at 501-502. ¶ 11 In Shadduck , this Court held that an agreement to arbitrate disputes arising from the contract encompasses tort claims where the facts which support a tort action also support a breach of contract action.

1995Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Co., 128 Pa. Commw. 610, 614 , 564 A.2d 523, 525 (1989); “(9) The dispute in the instant case falls within the scope of the arbitration clause contained in the endorsement since it involves the entitlement of the estate of JayneAnn Craley to recover uninsured motorist benefits under the policy; and “(10) Therefore, the defendants are entitled to have this dispute submitted to arbitration.

1995Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Co., 128 Pa. Commw. 610, 614 , 564 A.2d 523, 525 (1989); “(9) The dispute in the instant case falls within the scope of the arbitration clause contained in the endorsement since it involves the entitlement of the estate of JayneAnn Craley to recover uninsured motorist benefits under the policy; and “(10) Therefore, the defendants are entitled to have this dispute submitted to arbitration.