Third DCA: Malicious Prosecution Claim Against Employer not Subject to Arbitration
Although it's difficult to tell all of the facts from the Court's brief opinion, it would appear that the employee had an employment contract with his employer in which he agreed to arbitrate rather than litigate any employment-related claims under the "Employment Retirement Income Security Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Equal Pay Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Older Workers' Benefits Protection Act, as well as all other federal, state, and local employment-related laws, regulations, rules or theories." The contract specifically excluded from arbitration, however, those claims brought under "the workers' compensation laws."
The employee here brought suit against the employer for malicious prosecution. The Third DCA held that "the instant claim stems directly from [the employer's] actions during the workers' compensation case," and therefore "it is not arbitrable under the parties' agreement." Although the opinion doesn't say so, I suspect that this must stem from some allegedly false accusation of workers' compensation fraud. Cross v. Braman Motors, Inc.
