Duncan v. International Markets Live, Inc., No. 20-3392 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiff filed suit against IML in state court, alleging claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, unjust enrichment, equitable estoppel, and fraudulent misrepresentation. After removal to federal court, the district court found that there was a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the parties had agreed to arbitrate and then denied IML's motion to compel arbitration.
The Eighth Circuit remanded to the district court for a trial to determine whether an arbitration agreement exists. In this case, viewing the record in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the district court found that material facts remain in dispute as to whether the parties agreed to arbitrate. The court explained that the next step should have been to hold a trial pursuant to 9 U.S.C. 4.
Court Description: [Per Curiam - Before Kelly, Erickson, and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Arbitration. Where the district court found that material facts remain in dispute as to whether the parties agreed to arbitrate, the next step under 9 U.S.C. Sec. 4 was to proceed to trial, and the matter is remanded to the district court to hold a trial and make necessary findings of fact.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.