4D09-4332-ATP Flight School, LLC v. Sax

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Florida » Fourth District Court of Appeal » 2010 » 4D09-4332-ATP Flight School, LLC v. Sax

State: Florida

Court: Florida Southern District Court

Docket No: 4D09-4332.op

Case Date: 10/06/2010

Plaintiff: 4D09-4332-ATP Flight School, LLC

Defendant: Sax

Preview:DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2010 ATP FLIGHT SCHOOL, LLC, and AIRLINE TRANSPORT PROFESSIONAL CORP. OF USA, INC., Appellants, v. CHRISTINA SAX, Personal Representative of the Estate of BRYAN SAX, deceased, Appellee. No. 4D09-4332 [October 6, 2010] DAMOORGIAN, J. ATP Flight School, LLC and Airline Transport Professionals Corp. of USA, Inc. (collectively "ATP") appeal the trial court's non-final order denying their motion to compel arbitration and dismiss. We review the trial court's decision on the validity of an arbitration agreement de novo. Chapman v. King Motor Co. of S. Fla., 833 So. 2d 820, 821 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). In December 2008, Bryan Sax enrolled in flight training with ATP Flight School. On December 3, 2008, Mr. Sax executed a "Flight School Agreement" with ATP. The agreement contains, among other things, an arbitration clause, a choice of law provision, and a forum selection clause, which provide as follows: AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE Trainee agrees that, upon the sole and exclusive election of ATP, any claim, dispute, or controversy (whether in contract, tort, or otherwise) arising from or relating to Trainee's enrollment in a n y ATP flight training program or any dealings or agreements between ATP and Trainee, including the validity or enforceability of this arbitration clause or any part thereof or any other matter, shall be resolved by binding arbitration under th e Rules of the American Arbitration Association in Jacksonville, Florida. . . . The parties

exclusively select the application of Georgia substantive law without resort to Georgia's conflicts of law rules to resolve legal issues that may arise in the course of such arbitration or any litigation between the parties. Should an y such controversy arising from or related to this agreement or any other agreements or dealings between the parties be litigated rather than arbitrated, the parties select as the sole and exclusive venue for any such litigation the state and federal courts in Jacksonville, Florida. (emphasis added). On December 6, 2008, while training at ATP, Mr. Sax was killed in a mid-air collision between his plane and another flight school's plane. Mr. Sax's wife, Christina Sax, brought a wrongful death action against ATP asserting that ATP's negligence caused the fatal crash. ATP moved to compel arbitration and dismiss the action based on the Flight School Agreement's arbitration clause. ATP also argued that venue should be transferred to Jacksonville, Florida, pursuant to the agreement's forum selection clause. Mrs. Sax countered that the arbitration clause was unconscionable, and therefore, unenforceable. In her response, she alleged that: (a) the Flight School Agreement was an adhesion contract and significantly one-sided in favor of ATP; (b) Mr. Sax was unable to review the agreement and consider its ramifications since it was executed three days before his death; (c) the bargaining powers of Mr. Sax and ATP were unequal at the time the agreement was signed; (d) the agreement gave ATP full discretion in deciding whether to arbitrate and mandated that arbitration be held in Jacksonville, Florida, where ATP was headquartered; (e) the agreement contained a choice of law provision requiring application of Georgia law against Florida public policy; and (f) the agreement contained an absolute waiver of liability which unfairly prohibited any claims by Mr. Sax's descendants. At the hearing on the motion, ATP argued that the arbitration clause was valid and enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C.

Download 4D09-4332.op.pdf