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

Summary

The court held that Citibank did not waive arbitration by litigating debt-collection actions before seeking arbitration of subsequent Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act claims because the proceedings were not sufficiently closely related and the arbitration agreement preserved arbitration of later claims. The court further held that the superior court improperly decided whether the arbitrator could award statewide injunctive relief; that interpretation issue must initially be decided in arbitration. The court affirmed the stay and order compelling arbitration, vacated the ruling permitting statewide injunctive relief, and remanded. Justice Maassen, joined by Chief Justice Fabe, dissented, arguing that the attorney-fee claims and the later statutory claims were closely related and that Citibank waived arbitration by litigating the fee claims in court.