scope of an arbitration clause in North Carolina

2015See Ragan v. Wheat First Sec., Inc., 138 N.C.App. 453 , 459, 531 S.E.2d 874 , 878 (2000) (applying the plain meaning rule to interpret the scope of an arbitration clause). *342 "Where the language of a contract is plain and unambiguous, the construction of the agreement is a matter of law; and the court may not ignore or delete any of its provisions, nor insert words into it, but must construe the contract as written, in the light of the undisputed evidence as to the custom, usage, and meaning of its terms." ...

2015See Ragan v. Wheat First Sec., Inc., 138 N.C.App. 453 , 459, 531 S.E.2d 874 , 878 (2000) (applying the plain meaning rule to interpret the scope of an arbitration clause). *342 "Where the language of a contract is plain and unambiguous, the construction of the agreement is a matter of law; and the court may not ignore or delete any of its provisions, nor insert words into it, but must construe the contract as written, in the light of the undisputed evidence as to the custom, usage, and meaning of its terms." ...

2025The question is not whether the arbitrators decided wisely but whether they went beyond the limits established by the agreement between the Company and the Union.”). “[W]hether a claim falls within the scope of an arbitration clause and is thus subject to arbitration depends not on the characterization of the claim as tort or contract, but on the relationship of the claim to the subject matter of the arbitration clause.” Rodgers Builders, 76 N.C.

2015App. 16 , 23—24, 331 S.E.2d 726, 731 (1985) (citations and quotation marks omitted). “[W]hether a claim falls within the scope of an arbitration clause and is thus subject to arbitration depends not on the characterization of the claim as tort or contract, but on the relationship of the claim to the subject matter of the arbitration clause.” Id. at 24 , 331 S.E.2d at 731 (citations omitted). {27} In McQueen, the North Carolina Court of Appeals addressed the scope of an arbitration clause which specified that “[a]ll claims . . . arising out of, or relating to, the Contract Documents or the brea

2015TGK Enters. v. Clayco, Inc., 978 F. Supp. 2d 540, 549 (E.D.N.C. 2013).

2015If the plain language of a contract is clear, the intention of the parties is inferred from the words of the contract." State v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 193 N.C.App. 1 , 12-13, 666 S.E.2d 783 , 791 (2008) (citations omitted); see also Capek v. Devito, 564 Pa. 267 , 767 A.2d 1047 , 1050 (2001) (" '[W]hen a written contract is clear and unequivocal, its meaning must be determined by its contents alone.' In construing a contract, we must determine the intent of the parties and give effect to all of the provisions therein." (citation omitted)).

2015If the plain language of a contract is clear, the intention of the parties is inferred from the words of the contract." State v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 193 N.C.App. 1 , 12-13, 666 S.E.2d 783 , 791 (2008) (citations omitted); see also Capek v. Devito, 564 Pa. 267 , 767 A.2d 1047 , 1050 (2001) (" '[W]hen a written contract is clear and unequivocal, its meaning must be determined by its contents alone.' In construing a contract, we must determine the intent of the parties and give effect to all of the provisions therein." (citation omitted)).

2002In Bos Material Handling v. Crown Controls Corp., 137 Cal.App.3d 99, 105-06 , 186 Cal.Rptr. 740, 742-43 (1982), the court interpreted an arbitration clause in a dealer agreement.

2002In Bos Material Handling v. Crown Controls Corp., 137 Cal.App.3d 99, 105-06 , 186 Cal.Rptr. 740, 742-43 (1982), the court interpreted an arbitration clause in a dealer agreement.

1998In other words, “ ‘[a]n order to arbitrate the particular grievance should not be denied unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute.’ ” United Parcel Service, Inc. v. McFall, 940 S.W.2d 716, 719 (Tex. Ct. App. 1997) (citations omitted).