Sitcomm Arbitration Association

Last updated
Sitcomm Arbitration Association
IndustryLaw
ServicesFraudulent arbitration based on sovereign citizen ideology

Innovated Holdings, Inc, [1] , better known under the trade name Sitcomm Arbitration Association, is a "pirate" [2] arbitration company located in Wyoming [3] and associated with the sovereign citizen movement. It has been identified as a "sham" by courts, [4] having filed "fraudulent arbitration awards in several states", and the Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism characterises it as "the largest promoter of fraudulent arbitration". [5]

A 2021 ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a District Court finding vacating an award made by Sitcomm on the grounds that there was no evidence of a valid arbitration agreement between the parties. [4] In another case, United States Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter described Sitcomm's modus operandi thus:

an extremely troubling fraudulent “arbitration” scheme whereby a supposed aggrieved party (Mr. Matios) presents an “arbitration contract” to the defending party (the City), while simultaneously declaring that a failure to respond to the contract will result, by tacit acquiescence, in a binding arbitration agreement. [6]

The process was unilateral, as the City of Loveland had never agreed to participate in an arbitration with Matios. The "Notice of arbitration hearing" sent to the city also failed to specify the location for the purported "hearing". The supposed arbitrator in this case was identified as Bret "Eeon" Jones, [6] a convicted sex offender and sovereign citizen who was sentenced in 2019 to three years and eight months in prison for failing to register as a sex offender, and driving without a valid licence. [7] Although the City of Loveland had responded several times by specifying that it did not intend to participate in the arbitration, Sitcomm eventually issued a "Final Arbitration Award" ordering the city to pay $300 million to Matios. [6]

In an article in the Minnesota Law Review, the case of Teverbaugh v. Lima One Capital was analysed: "It was—as another federal judge would later proclaim—“unlike any other [that] this [c]ourt has ever seen.”", consisting of "a bizarre jumble of inconsistent, nonsensical word salad". [2] The tactics of Sitcomm are described in detail. Lima One was asserted by the purported arbitrator as having accepted the case "by silence". The award made no mention of underlying facts, but instead contained "cryptic references to the Uniform Commercial Code" (a hallmark of SovCit practices). Having been rebuffed in court, Teverbaugh filed another claim in Illinois, listing "A.M.T. Design" as plaintiff, and also filed in Mississippi. She also filed separate Sitcomm arbitration claims in her favour in Illinois and Indiana, with similar language. [2]

In August 2021, Sitcomm was held jointly and severally liable for a $1,384,371.24 fine in a default judgment for violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). [8]

Further reading

Related Research Articles

Arbitration, in the context of the law of the United States, is a form of alternative dispute resolution. Specifically, arbitration is an alternative to litigation through which the parties to a dispute agree to submit their respective evidence and legal arguments to a third party for resolution. In practice, arbitration is generally used as a substitute for litigation. In some contexts, an arbitrator has been described as an umpire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sovereign citizen movement</span> Anti-government, anti-taxation conspiracy theorists

The sovereign citizen movement is a loose group of anti-government activists, litigants, tax protesters, financial scammers, and conspiracy theorists based mainly in the United States. Sovereign citizens have their own pseudolegal belief system based on misinterpretations of common law and claim to not be subject to any government statutes unless they consent to them. The movement appeared in the United States in the early 1970s and has since expanded to other countries; the similar freeman on the land movement emerged during the 2000s in Canada before spreading to other Commonwealth countries. The FBI describes sovereign citizens as "anti-government extremists who believe that even though they physically reside in this country, they are separate or 'sovereign' from the United States".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal Arbitration Act</span> United States legal statute

The United States Arbitration Act, more commonly referred to as the Federal Arbitration Act or FAA, is an act of Congress that provides for non-judicial facilitation of private dispute resolution through arbitration. It applies in both state courts and federal courts, as was held in Southland Corp. v. Keating. It applies in all contracts, excluding contracts of seamen, railroad employees, or any other class of workers involved in foreign or interstate commerce, and it is predicated on an exercise of the Commerce Clause powers granted to Congress in the U.S. Constitution.

Westgate Resorts is an American timeshare resort company founded by David A. Siegel in 1982.

First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938 (1995), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on who decides whether a dispute is subject to arbitration, the courts or an arbitrator.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Herbert Jay Stern</span> American judge (born 1936)

Herbert Jay Stern is a trial lawyer, with a national practice in civil and criminal litigation, as well as mediation and arbitration. Earlier in his career, Stern served as a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and as the United States Judge for Berlin.

Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case concerning contract law and arbitration. The case arose from a class action filed in Florida against a payday lender alleging the loan agreements the plaintiffs had signed were unenforceable because they essentially charged a higher interest rate than that permitted under Florida law.

Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 395 (1967), is a United States Supreme Court decision that established what has become known as the "separability principle" in contracts with arbitration clauses. Following an appellate court ruling a decade earlier, it reads the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to require that any challenges to the enforceability of such a contract first be heard by an arbitrator, not a court, unless the claim is that the clause itself is unenforceable.

Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case that held that state and federal courts cannot, on a motion to vacate or to modify an arbitration award, expand the limited scope of judicial review specified in 9 U.S.C. §§ 10 and 11, including terms that were agreed upon by the parties.

C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma, 532 U.S. 411 (2001), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the tribe waived its sovereign immunity when it agreed to a contract containing an arbitration agreement.

Arbitration in the United States is governed by the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, which requires courts to compel parties who agree to arbitration to participate in binding arbitration, the decision from which is binding upon the parties. Since the passage of the FAA, both state and federal courts have examined arbitration clauses, as well as other statutes involving arbitration clauses, for validity and enforceability.

Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 532 U.S. 105 (2001), was a United States Supreme Court case that concerned whether the "section one exemption" of the Federal Arbitration Act applied to an employment contract of an employee at Circuit City Stores. The Court held that the exemption was limited to the specific listing of professions contained in the text. This decision meant that general employment contracts, like the one Adams sued under, would have to be arbitrated in accordance with the federal statute.

Shearson/American Express Inc. v. McMahon, 482 U.S. 220 (1987), is a United States Supreme Court decision concerning arbitration of private securities fraud claims arising under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. By a 5–4 margin the Court held that its holding in a 1953 case, Wilko v. Swan, that the nonwaiver provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 prevented the mandatory arbitration of such claims, did not apply to claims under the 1934 Act due to differences in the corresponding language of the two statutes, reversing a decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that had affirmed what had been considered settled law, despite the lack of a precedent. It likewise held that claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) were arbitrable, affirming an order from the district court that the Second Circuit had also upheld.

14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, 556 U.S. 247 (2009), is a United States labor law case decided by the United States Supreme Court on the rights of unionized workers to sue their employer for age discrimination. In this 2009 decision, the Court decided that whenever a union contract "clearly and unmistakably" requires that all age discrimination claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 be decided through arbitration, then employees subject to that contract cannot have those claims heard in court.

Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 473 U.S. 614 (1985), is a United States Supreme Court decision concerning arbitration of antitrust claims. The Court heard the case on appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which had ruled that the arbitration clause in a Puerto Rican car dealer's franchise agreement was broad enough to reach its antitrust claim. By a 5–3 margin it upheld the lower court, requiring that the dealer arbitrate its claim before a panel in Tokyo, as stipulated in the contract.

Wilko v. Swan, 346 U.S. 427 (1953), is a United States Supreme Court decision on the arbitration of securities fraud claims. It had originally been brought by an investor who claimed his broker at Hayden Stone had sold stock to him without disclosing that he and the firm were the primary sellers. By a 7–2 margin the Court held that the provisions of the Securities Act of 1933 barring any waiver of rights under that statute took precedence over the Federal Arbitration Act's (FAA) requirement that arbitration clauses in contracts be given full effect by federal courts. It reversed a decision to the contrary by a divided panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David A. Siegel</span> American businessman (born 1935)

David Alan Siegel is an American businessman who founded Westgate Resorts Ltd, a Florida-based timeshare resort firm, and is its president and chief executive officer. He has ten biological children and two adopted children. Siegel is CEO of CFI Resorts Management Inc and Central Florida Investments Inc. His other businesses include real estate, construction, hotel and apartment management, travel services, insurance, transportation, and retail.

Pseudolaw consists of pseudolegal statements, beliefs, or practices that are claimed to be based on accepted law or legal doctrine but which deviate significantly from most conventional understandings of law and jurisprudence or which originate from non-existent statutes or legal principles the advocate or adherent incorrectly believes exist.

Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 586 U.S. ___ (2019), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on January 8, 2019. The case decided the question of whether a court may disregard a valid delegation of arbitrability—a contract provision stating that an arbitrator should decide whether a dispute is subject to arbitration—when the argument in favor of arbitration is "wholly groundless." In a unanimous (9-0) opinion written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court sided with petitioner Henry Schein, Inc., holding that the "wholly groundless" exception to arbitrability violates the Federal Arbitration Act, and therefore a valid delegation of arbitrability should be honored even if a court believes the argument for arbitration to be "wholly groundless." It was Justice Kavanaugh's first Supreme Court opinion.

Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the use of class arbitration proceedings. In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s decision and held that arbitration on a classwide basis could not be compelled based on the provision’s ambiguous language. The Court relied on its previous decision in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int'l Corp. which held that class arbitration procedures could not be compelled without indication that the parties to the arbitration had agreed to these procedures.

References

  1. ↑ "Plaza Home Mortgage, Inc. v. Innovated Holdings, Inc. et al". Justia.
  2. 1 2 3 Horton, David (2022-08-19). "Pirate Arbitration". Minnesota Law Review. 2022: 2111–2171. Retrieved 22 October 2022.
  3. ↑ Johns, Marian (Dec 23, 2019). "Lawsuit alleges Wyoming-based arbitration association is a 'sham'". Legal Newsline. Retrieved 22 October 2022.
  4. 1 2 "Third Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Petition to Confirm "Sham" Arbitration Award". JDSupra. Retrieved 22 October 2022.
  5. ↑ Karlik, Michael. "Federal judge rejects attempt to extract $300 million from Loveland through 'bogus' arbitration". The Gazette. Retrieved 22 October 2022.
  6. 1 2 3 "Eyoel-Dawit Matios v. City of Loveland". United States District Court for the District of Colorado.
  7. ↑ Szydlowski, Joe. "Eviction protest led cops to Salinas 'sovereign citizen,' sex offender with long alias". Salinas Californian.
  8. ↑ "Default Judgment – #275 in PennyMac Loan Services, LLC v. Innovated Holdings, Inc. (S.D. Miss., 2:19-cv-00193) – CourtListener.com". CourtListener.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.