William Ballou v. Asset Marketing Services, LLC, No. 21-3913 (8th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Three elderly individuals spent tens of thousands of dollars buying collectible coins, often priced far above market value, from Asset Marketing Services, LLC (“AMS”). They sued AMS for violating Minnesota law. AMS moved to stay the case and compel arbitration. The district court refused, and AMS appeals.
The Eighth Circuit reversed and remanded for trial on the extent to which the parties agreed to arbitrate. The court explained that the parties agree that Minnesota’s law applies. Under its law, contract formation requires an offer, acceptance, and consideration. In this case, there are genuine issues of material fact about whether and when the parties formed contracts that incorporated the arbitration agreement.
On appeal, AMS advances various new arguments against applying the Consent Order, including that it should be assessed by an arbitrator in the first instance, not a court. This Court declines to address these new arguments. In any event, Plaintiffs cannot enforce the Order because they lack standing to do so—an argument AMS did raise before the district court.
Court Description: [Benton, Author, with Gruender and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Arbitration. The record presents myriad issues of material fact on whether the parties formed contracts that included an arbitration provision, and these issues must be resolved at trial; the district court's order denying defendant's motion to stay the case and compel arbitration is reversed, and the matter is remanded for for trial on the arbitration issue under 9 U.S.C. Sec. 4.
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.