Americo Life, Inc. v. Myer

2014 WL 2789429 (2014)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Americo Life, Inc. v. Myer

Texas Supreme Court
2014 WL 2789429 (2014)

Facts

In 1998, Robert Myer and Strider Marketing Group, Inc. (collectively, Myer) (plaintiff) sold a collection of insurance companies to Americo Life, Inc. (Americo) (defendant). The parties agreed that Americo would provide an up-front payment to Myer for the businesses. The parties then executed a trailer agreement for additional payments to Myer based on the businesses’ future earnings. The trailer agreement also contained a clause, providing that the parties would refer disputes to three arbitrators who were knowledgeable, independent businesspeople or professionals. The arbitration clause also provided that each party would appoint an individual arbitrator and that the two arbitrators would select a third arbitrator to complete the panel. The arbitration clause also provided the arbitration would comply with the rules of the American Arbitration Association (AAA). A dispute arose between the parties, and Americo invoked the arbitration clause in 2005. The AAA Rules in 2005 required that arbitrators must be impartial and independent and that arbitrators would be disqualified for partiality or lack of independence. Myer alleged Americo’s first-choice and second-choice arbitrator were partial to Americo, and the AAA struck both candidates over Americo’s objections. The arbitration proceeded, and the arbitration panel awarded Myer damages. When Myer filed a motion to confirm the award in the trial court, Americo renewed its objection to the first-choice arbitrator’s disqualification. Americo argued that the AAA failed to follow the parties’ agreement that “each arbitrator shall be a knowledgeable, independent businessperson or professional.” The district court vacated the award, and Myer appealed to the Texas Court of Appeals. After various appellate proceedings, the Texas Court of Appeals found the arbitration panel was appropriately formed under the agreement. Americo appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership