Close X
Attorney Spotlight

How did an interest in healthcare policy lead Robert Platt to a career in the law? Find out more>

Search

Close X

Experience

Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

Primary Care Providers Win Challenge of CMS Interpretation of Enhanced Payment Law

With the help and support of the Tennessee Medical Association, 21 Tennessee physicians of underserved communities joined together and retained Bass, Berry & Sims to file suit against the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to stop improper collection efforts. Our team, led by David King, was successful in halting efforts to recoup TennCare payments that were used legitimately to expand services in communities that needed them. Read more

Tennessee Medical Association & Bass, Berry & Sims

Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

GDPR Top 5 Actions You Should Take Now

The EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) went into effect on May 25th. As most organizations are aware, the GDPR applies not only to EU businesses but also many companies in the U.S. While the deadline is quickly approaching, most organizations are still grappling with the implications of the regulation on their business. Even if your readiness efforts are behind the curve, the GDPR Top 5 Actions You Should Take NOW will help you begin your efforts towards compliance and help mitigate your organization's risk in the short-term.

Click here to download the checklist.

Chris Lazarini Provides Insight on Compelling Non-Signatories to Arbitrate Disputes

Securities Litigation Commentator

Publications

March 6, 2017

Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Chris Lazarini provided insight on a case in which a widow and one-time named beneficiary of her husband's IRA account acquired the account assets after her husband's death, although she was not the named beneficiary of the account at the time of her husband's death. The named beneficiary sued the widow and the broker/dealer firm. After the trial court directed the parties to arbitration, the widow appealed, claiming she did not have to arbitrate since she was a non-signatory to the agreement. The Appellate Court affirmed, saying the widow was an "heir" and bound by her husband's arbitration agreement.

Chris provided the analysis for Securities Litigation Commentator (SLC). The full text of the analysis is below and used with permission from the publication. If you would like to receive additional content from the SLC, please visit the SLC website to sign up for the newsletter.

Javorsky vs. Javorsky and TD Ameritrade, No. 103896 (Ohio App., 8Dist., 1/26/17) 

*Whether an arbitration agreement applies to a non-signatory is a question of law.

**Non-signatories may be estopped from denying arbitration where they knowingly accept the benefits of the agreement or claim to be a third-party beneficiary of the agreement. 

In 2004, Andrew Javorsky opened an IRA account with TD Ameritrade. In the following years, he changed the beneficiary designation three times, alternating between his son Thomas and his wife Joan (Thomas' stepmother). The last designation form, signed before his death, named his son as beneficiary. Acting on Joan's request, TD Ameritrade took the unfortunate step of transferring the entirety of Andrew's IRA account to her account, which she subsequently liquidated.

Thomas sued Joan and TD Ameritrade, claiming to be the proper beneficiary of the account. Joan cross-claimed against TD Ameritrade, asserting causes of action for negligence and promissory estoppel. TD Ameritrade moved to compel the entire dispute to arbitration, relying on the arbitration clause in the account agreement. The trial court granted the motion, and Joan appealed, arguing that she did not have to arbitrate because she was a non-signatory to the agreement.

The Court affirms, noting that the arbitration agreement requires arbitration of all controversies "arising out of and relating to" the IRA account and binds Andrew's "heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns." Because Joan is an "heir," she is bound by the agreement. Specifically addressing the non-signatory issue, the Court finds that Joan is estopped from denying arbitration because she accepted a benefit conferred by the agreement – receipt of the funds – and because she claims to be a third-party beneficiary of the agreement.


Related Professionals

Related Services

Notice

Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.