affinitylifestyles.com v. Wilson ( 2014 )

 as a whole must be sent to the arbitrator. Rent-A-Ctr., W., Inc. v. Jackson,
561 U.S. 63, 70-71 (2010): Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546
U.S. 440, 445-46 (2006). Wilson argues that the brevity of the arbitration
clause makes it unenforceable, but the details, once an agreement to
arbitrate is shown, are supplied by the relevant state and federal statutes.
See NRS 38.222-38.247; 9 U.S.C. §§ 5-13, 16 (2012). Thus, Wilson did not
establish a defense to enforcement of the valid arbitration clause. Gonski
v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 126 Nev. „ 245 P.3d 1164, 1169
(2010). The clause must be enforced and the claims against Affinity sent
to arbitration. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court REVERSED AND
REMAND this matter to the district court for proceedings consistent with
this order.'
Saitta
'We do not address Affinity's argument that the district court erred
in denying its motion for a more definite statement of Wilson's claims.
Although, as happened here, a party may appeal the order denying
reconsideration of the order denying the motion to compel arbitration, this
does not render immediately appealable everything moved for in the
reconsideration motion, such as Affinity's motion for a more definite
statement. NRS 38.247(1)(a); NRCP 54(a), 59(e); NRAP 4(a)(4)(C). In any
event, as the claims against Affinity must be sent to arbitration, this issue
is moot.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A tAlpt94
cc: Hon. Adriana Escobar. District Judge
Carolyn Worrell, Settlement Judge
Law Firm Express
Lovato Law
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e