Monarch v. Petra

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Petra’s motion to stay the litigation and compel arbitration, holding that Petra waived its contractual arbitration right. Petra knew of the right but acted inconsistently with it by securing vacatur of the default without disclosing its intent to arbitrate and by initially answering without asserting arbitration, while Monarch was prejudiced by relinquishing the default and litigating the counterclaims. The court declined to decide whether a recent federal arbitration-waiver decision required modification of Montana’s waiver factors.