Court Determines Arbitrator Must Decide Whether Claim Is Subject To Arbitration

In Doe v. TCSC, LLC, d/b/a Hendrick Toyota of North Charleston, the South Carolina Court of Appeals punted to an arbitrator to decide whether a car dealer’s broad arbitration provision encompasses events arising four-and-a-half years after Jane Doe purchased her car. The factual context, as described by the court: “Doe returned to the dealership to have the car serviced. She also spoke with a salesman about trading in her 2011 car for a new one. Despite the salesman’s persistent pitches, Doe decided to buy elsewhere. The rebuffed salesman, for reasons known only to him, sought revenge by posting an ad posing as Doe on a sexually explicit website, together with Doe’s contact information. Minutes later, Doe began receiving strange telephone calls and text messages, some of which were sexually suggestive.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s