Janet Hudson v. Citibank (south Dakota) Na, Alaska Law Offices…

Summary

The court held that Citibank did not waive arbitration by litigating separate debt-collection actions because the later UTPA claims concerning attorney's-fee practices were not sufficiently closely related to the collection claims and the arbitration agreements expressly permitted later arbitration. The court also held that the superior court improperly decided whether an arbitrator could award statewide injunctive relief; that issue must first be decided in arbitration. Justice Maassen, joined by Chief Justice Fabe, dissented, concluding that the attorney's-fee and UTPA claims were closely related and that Citibank waived arbitration by litigating the fee claims in court.