Royal Caribbean Cruises v. UNIVERSAL EMP., 664 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
Royal Caribbean Cruises v. UNIVERSAL EMP., 664 So. 2d 1107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“rbitration clauses like this are to be given the broadest possible interpretation to accomplish the salutary purpose of resolving controversies out of court.”
22 citation events (16 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: LBC Design & Construction v. Serruya (fladistctapp, 2011-04-06)
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) LBC Design & Construction v. Serruya
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
rbitration clauses like this are to be given the broadest possible interpretation to accomplish the salutary purpose of resolving controversies out of court.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Auchter Co. v. Zagloul
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2007 · confidence medium
Corp. v. Holman, 769 So.2d 481, 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); and that, because arbitration agreements are a favored means of dispute resolution, any doubts concerning their scope should generally be resolved in favor of arbitration.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Waterhouse Const. Group v. 5891 Sw 64th St. (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2007 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Zager Plumbing, Inc. v. JPI Nat'l Constr., Inc., 785 So.2d 660, 662 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); State Farm Fire & Cas.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Roth v. Cohen
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)(where contract between the parties provided for arbitration of "any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement," claims for defamation, fraud, and *501 business interference clearly had their origin or genesis in the contract and arbitration clause applied).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Dale Supply Company v. York International Corp
Tenn. Ct. App. · 2003 · confidence medium
For example, one Florida court repeated the “axiom of federal and Florida law” that arbitration clauses such as the one here “are to be given broadest possible interpretation to accomplish the salutary purpose of resolving controversies out of court.” Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. Dist.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Benedict v. Pensacola Motor Sales, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · confidence medium
II Arbitration clauses are to be given the "broadest possible interpretation to accomplish the salutory purpose of resolving controversies out of court." Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hammaker v. Brown & Brown, Inc.
E.D. Va. · 2002 · confidence medium
Although Hammaker’s claim is statutory, Hammaker’s employment had its “origin or genesis in the [employment] contract.” See Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (quoting Sweet Dreams Unlimited v. Dial-A-Mattress Int’l, Ltd., 1 F.3d 639 , 642 (7th Cir.1993)) (interpreting hiring contract to contemplate tort claims where it concerns letters of employment that were indispensable to the operation of the agreement between the parties).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Giunto v. Florida Coca-Cola Bottling Co.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1999 · confidence medium
This is akin to an arbitration clause which accomplishes "the salutary purpose of resolving controversies out of court." Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). .
cited Cited "see" Coriat v. GLOBAL ASSUR. GROUP, INC.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d at 1107 .
discussed Cited "see" American Home Assurance Co. v. Total Drywall & Stucco Corp.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (holding that arbitration clauses are to be given “the broadest possible interpretation to accomplish the salutory purpose of resolving controversies out of court,” where dispute had its “origin or genesis in the contract.”).
cited Cited "see" Ocwen Financial Corp. v. Holman
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).
cited Cited "see" Poole and Kent Co. v. GUSI ERICKSON CONST. COMPANY
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (involving an "arising out of or relating to" arbitration clause).
discussed Cited "see" Prosource Services Corp. v. Thomas Group, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA1995)(dispute that has “its ‘origin or genesis in the contract,’ and was both ‘directly related to, and ... would not have occurred but for’ the relationship it established” subject to arbitration); Fowler v. Watts, 659 So.2d 374 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)(where subsequent superseding agreement does not include arbitration clause order compelling arbitration reversed); Trinchitella v. D.R.F., Inc., 584 So.2d 35 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)(same).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." American Intern. Group v. Siemens Building
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Universal Employment Agency, 664 So.2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)(recognizing "that arbitration clauses... are to be given the broadest possible interpretation to accomplish the salutary purpose of resolving controversies out of court.").
ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD., Appellant,
v.
UNIVERSAL EMPLOYMENT AGENCY, Appellee.
95-2277.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Dec 13, 1995.
664 So. 2d 1107
Schwartz, C.J., and Nesbitt and Levy.
Cited by 17 opinions  |  Published

[*1108] Keller, Houck & Shinkle and John Keller, Miami, for appellant.

McCormick & Koretzky and David Koretzky, Miami, for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and LEVY, JJ.

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying the defendant's motion to compel arbitration. We reverse.

Royal Caribbean Cruises entered into a "hiring agreement" with appellee, Universal Employment Agency, a Colombian corporation, under which UEA was to provide the shipping company with the names of prospective crew members. If Royal Caribbean decided to hire such a person, it issued UEA a "letter of employment," to be used by the crewman to secure the necessary visa to enter the United States where he would join a crew. During the term of the agreement, several Colombians presented what appeared to be fraudulent letters of employment to the American Embassy in Bogota. In this action, UEA claimed that Royal Caribbean had falsely told the Embassy that the agency was responsible for the fraud, with the result that it was forced to suspend its employment operations. The complaint sought money damages for the alleged intentional torts of defamation, fraud, and business interference.

The hiring agreement contains a standard American Arbitration Association clause which provides that:

[a]ny controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach of any term or provision hereof shall be settled by arbitration in the City of Miami, State of Florida, U.S.A. in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association.

The issue on appeal is whether that clause applies to this action. We find that it does.

It is now an axiom of federal, see Moses H. Cone Memorial Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 103 S.Ct. 927, 74 L.Ed.2d 765 (1983), and Florida law, see State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Middleton, 648 So.2d 1200 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), that arbitration clauses like this are to be given the broadest possible interpretation to accomplish the salutary purpose of resolving controversies out of court. In this case, the entire underlying controversy concerns the letters of employment which were a key element and were, in fact, indispensable to the operation of the hiring agreement between the parties. The dispute thus clearly had its "origin or genesis in the contract," Sweet Dreams Unlimited v. Dial-A-Mattress Int'l, Ltd., 1 F.3d 639, 642 (7th Cir.1993), and was both "directly related to, and... would not have occurred but for" the relationship it established. Chase Manhattan Inv. Servs., Inc. v. Miranda, 658 So.2d 181, 182 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Since all this is true, in turn, this action — even though it sounds entirely in tort and neither claims a breach of the contract[*1109] nor involves its performance or interpretation — must be deemed to be one "arising out of or relating to [the] Agreement" within the meaning of the clause in question. In common with apparently every other court which has interpreted this language, we therefore conclude that the present action must be referred to arbitration. Sweet Dreams, 1 F.3d at 639; Carib Aviation & Marine Consultants, Ltd. v. Mitsubishi Aircraft Int'l, Inc., 640 F. Supp. 582 (S.D.Fla. 1986); Beaver Coaches, Inc. v. Revels Nationwide R.V. Sales, 543 So.2d 359 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); see also Chase Manhattan, 658 So.2d at 181, 182 n. 1, and cases cited (arbitration required for tort actions "arising out of ... employment"). Compare Mediterranean Enters. v. Ssangyong Corp., 708 F.2d 1458, 1463 (9th Cir.1983) (construing clauses requiring arbitration of disputes "arising under the Agreement"); In re Kinoshita & Co., 287 F.2d 951 (2d Cir.1961) (same). See generally Stinson-Head, Inc. v. City of Sanibel, 661 So.2d 119 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

Accordingly the order below is reversed and the cause remanded to stay the proceedings below pending arbitration of the issues raised by the appellee's complaint.

Reversed and remanded with directions.