Preliminary Injunction of Arbitration Proceedings - Six Clinics Holding Corporation, II v. Cafcomp Systems, Inc.

Authors

Heidi Albers

Abstract

The issue presented in Six Clinics Holding Corporation, I v. Cafcomp Systems, Inc., is whether a court is prohibited from issuing a preliminary injunction in a case subject to arbitration.' The parties had a private agreement to arbitrate any disputes, but the court enjoined the arbitration in order to determine a federal issue outside the arbitrator's jurisdiction The defendant argued that the Anti-Injunction Act, which prohibits federal courts from enjoining state court proceedings, was violated.4 However, the court found a loophole by stating that a private arbitration is not a state proceeding and thus is not governed by the Act.5 This escape hatch is an all too easy method to avoid the Anti-Injunction Act's purpose and strictly construed exceptions. By allowing a preliminary injunction of an arbitration proceeding, the Six Clinics court has diluted the strength and effect of alternative dispute resolution methods like arbitration.

Recommended Citation

Heidi Albers, Preliminary Injunction of Arbitration Proceedings - Six Clinics Holding Corporation, II v. Cafcomp Systems, Inc., 1998 J. Disp. Resol. (1998)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol1998/iss1/7