Here:
Questions presented:
I. Whether there is a non-textual “integrality exception” to the mandatory requirement in the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) that a substitute arbitrator “shall” be appointed by the court whenever the parties’ chosen arbitrator is unavailable for “any … reason”? 9 U.S.C. § 5.
Here are the materials in Parnell v. Cashcall Inc.:
Lower court materials here:
18-1 Cashcall Motion re Forum Non Conveniens
19-1 Cashcall Motion to Compel Arbitration
21 Parnell Response to Motion to Compel
22 Parnell Response to Motion re Forum
24 Cashcall Reply re Motion to Compel
Here is the opinion. An excerpt:
This appeal arises out of a disagreement between Abraham Inetianbor, who borrowed money at a high interest rate, and CashCall, Inc., the servicer of Mr. Inetianbor’s loan. Mr. Inetianbor filed a lawsuit against CashCall, which then sought to compel arbitration based on the loan agreement. The District Court ultimately refused to compel arbitration because the arbitration agreement in the loan document contained a forum selection clause that was integral to the agreement, and the specified forum was not available to arbitrate the dispute. CashCall appeals that decision here. After careful review, and with the benefit of oral argument, we affirm.
Briefs here:
Lower court materials here.
Here is the opinion in State ex rel. Swanson v. CashCall Inc.:
An excerpt:
Respondent State of Minnesota brought a consumer-enforcement action against appellants CashCall, Inc., and WS Funding, LLC, in July 2013, alleging that appellants are using a third company, Western Sky Financial, LLC, as a front to make usurious loans to Minnesota consumers. The state moved for a temporary injunction, and appellants moved to dismiss the state’s complaint pursuant to Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 12.02(e). The district court granted the temporary injunction and denied the dismissal motion. Appellants challenged both rulings in these consolidated appeals. Because the district court did not err by denying the dismissal motion and did not abuse its discretion by granting the temporary injunction, we affirm.
Here are the updated materials in Heldt v. Payday Financial LLC (D.S.D.):
36 Opposition to Motion to Compel Arbitration
46 Opposition to Motion to Stay
51 Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
56 Reply Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss
An excerpt:
ORDERED that Defendants, as the parties asserting that there is tribal court jurisdiction and that there ought to be tribal court exhaustion, must file within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order a declaratory judgment action in the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Court naming the Plaintiffs herein to address to that court the issue of tribal court jurisdiction and if that court concludes it has jurisdiction, and the availability of an arbitration forum as specified in the loan agreements in this case. In such a tribal court action, Plaintiffs of course may contest tribal court jurisdiction and assert their arguments as the unavailability of an arbitration forum as specified in the agreements without waiving their assertion that there is no tribal court jurisdiction. It is finally
ORDERED that the parties keep this Court advised of proceedings in the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Court by filing upon the conclusion of any tribal court proceedings and/or appeals, all pleadings filed by any party and all rulings by the tribal court as an attachment to an affidavit or stipulation.
Here.
An excerpt:
A prominent online lender that has increasingly run into state challenges — Western Sky Financial, owned by a tribal member of the Cheyenne River Sioux — has just announced that it will stop financing loans next month.
Here is the motion in Heldt v. Payday Financial LLC (D. S.D.):
Complaint here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.