Paduano et al v. Express Scripts, Inc. et al
HM Compounding Services, LLC, Nick Canner, Victor Paduano and Frank Scala |
OptumRx, Inc., Express Scripts, Inc., CVS Caremark Corp. and Prime Therapeutics LLC |
2:2014cv05376 |
September 12, 2014 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Central Islip Office |
Arlene R. Lindsay |
Arthur D. Spatt |
Fraud or Truth-In-Lending |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 108 MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER; In sum, the Court denies Caremarks motion to strike in its entirety Camhis declaration submitted in support of HMCs opposition to Caremarks motion to sever HMCs claims against Caremark and to compel arbitration of t hose claims. (Doc No. 91). The Court grants in part and denies in part Caremarks motion to sever HMCs claims against it and to compel arbitration of those claims (Doc No. 29). The Court grants in part and denies in part Optums motion to sever HMCs claims against it and to compel arbitration of those claims. (Doc No. 38). The Court also grants in part and denies in part Primes motion to sever HMCs claims against it and to compel arbitration of those claims. (Doc No. 59.) The Court grants ESIs m otion to sever HMCs claims against it and transfer those claims to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and the forum selection clause in the ESI Provider Agreement. (Doc No. 11) . The Court stays the entire action, including the claims brought by the Individual Plaintiffs, pursuant to Section 3 of the FAA. The Court denies HMCs letter motion dated October 14, 2014 (Doc No. 99) without prejudice for the reasons explained in P art II(6) of this Memorandum of Decision and Order. Finally, that part of the October 3, 2014 TRO applicable to the Individual Plaintiffs will remain in place pending arbitration, and that part of the October 3, 2014 TRO applicable to HMC is extended until such time as the respective arbitrator hears and determines any application for injunctive relief. Any requests to revisit the terms should be directed to the appropriate arbitrator, or, with respect to ESI, the federal district court in Misso uri.The Court recognizes that severing HMCs claims against Caremark, Optum, and Prime and submitting them to arbitration and severing and transferring HMCs claims against ESI to the federal district court in Missouri may lead to inconsistent results. Further, if one or more of the arbitrators deems the relevant Provider Agreement to be contracts of adhesion or finds that HMCs respective claims are not arbitrable, HMC would only have the opportunity to start at square one in this Court. It is alw ays more expeditious to try related claims in one forum rather than several, but allowing efficiency and economy to rule the day would effectively swallow Atlantic Marines holding in every case with multiple defendants. Valspar Corp., 2014 WL 1607584 , at *4. Furthermore, the Court finds that HMC, a sophisticated corporate entity, assumed these risks when it entered into the relevant arbitration provisions and forum selection clause. See "Decision" for further details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 10/27/2014. (Coleman, Laurie) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.