Darrel Felkner v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. Tom Swanson John Saffrow Douglas M. McCombs and John Mitchell

Good Law
800 F.2d 1466·55 U.S.L.W. 2276·1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 31303
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 29, 198685-5969California1,990 words

Opinion

Opinion

Canby, J.

Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., and the individual defendants appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to compel arbitration of Darrel Felkner’s claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 (1982), and other federal and state laws, and to stay trial proceedings pending the completion of arbitration. Because we conclude that no valid agreement to arbitrate this dispute existed, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

In 1975, Felkner opened a securities account with Dean Witter. At that time, he signed Dean Witter’s standard Customer Agreement, which provided, in part, that “[a]ny controversy arising out of or relating to this contract or breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration.” In May 1982, Felkner began trading commodities through Dean Witter. Although these trades were under the regulatory jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Felkner never entered into any additional agreement with Dean Witter concerning this new investment activity. During Felkner’s 13-month venture into the commodity markets, he allegedly lost more than $265,000.

On June 24, 1984, Felkner filed a complaint against Dean Witter…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.