Janiga v. Questar Capital Corp.

Dist. Ct. erred in denying without prejudice defendants' motion to stay plaintiff's action based on existence of arbitration clause alleging violation of Securities Exchange Act and fraud with respect to defendants' handling of plaintiff's investment account, where Dist. Ct. indicated that defendants could renew motion if Dist. Ct. determined that plaintiff had entered in contract with defendants containing arbitration clause. Dist. Ct. correctly found that it, as opposed to arbitrator, could properly resolve issue with respect to existence of contract between parties. However, motion for stay should have been granted where record showed that contract actually existed between parties as evidenced by plaintiff's signature on contract which otherwise contained arbitration clause.