In re Marcia L. Pate
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Georgia
198 B.R. 841 (1996)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
Marcia L. Pate (debtor) bought a mobile home from Melvin Williams Manufactured Homes (Melvin Williams) (defendant) and financed the purchase through Greentree Financial Corporation (Greentree). The sales contract for the mobile home contained an arbitration clause, which provided the parties would refer all disputes and claims arising from the contract to arbitration. The arbitration clause also stated the parties voluntarily and knowingly waived any right to a jury trial. The arbitration clause allowed Greentree to pursue a judicial remedy to enforce a security agreement. When Pate declared Chapter 13 bankruptcy, Greentree filed a secure claim within the bankruptcy proceedings. Pate filed an adversarial proceeding against Melvin Williams and Greentree, asserting they violated the Uniform Commercial Code–Sales adopted in Georgia, the Georgia Motor Vehicle Sales Finance Act, and the Federal Truth in Lending Act. After answering the complaint, Greentree filed a motion to stay proceedings and to compel Pate to submit the claims to arbitration. Pate asserted that under Georgia law, the arbitration clause lacked mutuality of obligation because the clause allowed Greentree to pursue judicial remedies while barring Pate from any judicial remedy. Pate also argued that enforcing the arbitration clause under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) conflicted with the policies and goals of the Bankruptcy Code.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dalis, J.)
What to do next…
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.