AZMI TAKIEDINE, Plaintiff v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., Defendant, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142065

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-In a case brought by plaintiff, a defendant's franchisee, alleging that defendant tried to make plaintiff's business unprofitable as part of a wider scheme to drive out franchisees to take back several defendant's stores, however because of the arbitration agreement, franchisees were unable to bring claims on their own and instead must trust that the Franchise Selection Committee, plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the court's imposed order to stay, finding that some of plaintiff's claims were subject to an arbitration agreement that parties signed, was granted because due to the vagueness of agreement and the specific nature of the dispute at issue, plaintiff could neither pursue his claim in federal court nor seek arbitration under FAA. The Court exercises its discretion to prevent the manifest injustice of leaving a potentially viable claim in limbo in perpetuity.