affinitylifestyles.com v. Wilson

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