By: Derek Hawkins//October 6, 2015//
Civil
WI Court of Appeals – District III
Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz, J., and Thomas Cane, Reserve Judge.
Franchise Law – Arbitration Process
2014AP1849 Building Werks Holdings, LLC v. Paul Davis Resotration, Inc.
We conclude Building Werks’ concerns about the fairness of the arbitration process are insufficient to permit anticipatory judicial intervention. Building Werks must submit its claims in this lawsuit to arbitration in accordance with the franchise agreements before seeking to vacate any award as tainted by fraud, bias or a manifest disregard of the law. However, because Building Werks’ unconscionability claim was directed solely at the validity of the arbitration provisions, and not the entire franchise agreements, the case law dictates it was a proper subject for judicial resolution. We conclude the circuit court properly granted summary judgment on the unconscionability claim because, as a matter of law, Building Werks has not demonstrated procedural or substantive unconscionability. Furthermore, the circuit court acted within its discretion in not compelling additional discovery with respect to the unconscionability claim. Accordingly, we affirm.
Decision
Affirmed. Per Curiam.