APEX 1 PROCESSING, INC., Appellant-Defendant, v. Akeala EDWARDS, with respect to Herself and Others likewise Situated, Appellee-Plaintiff.

Court of Appeals of Indiana.

*664 Douglas B. King, Matthew M. Adolay, wood & McLaughlin LLP, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellant.

Susan Verbonitz, Weir & Partners LLP, Philadelphia, PA, Attorney pro hac vice.

Irwin B. Levin, Richard E. Shevitz, Vess A. Miller, Cohen & Malad, LLP, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.


Apex 1 Processing, a “payday loan” business, includes with its loan agreements an arbitration provision that is compulsory. Akeala Edwards brought a class action [1] alleging Apex, conducting business as payday lender Paycheck Today, involved with unfair trade methods. Apex relocated to compel arbitration of Edwards’ claim, nevertheless the test court denied the motion considering that the arbitrator designated in the contract had been no further permitted to perform arbitrations that are such. The trial court correctly determined that the agreement was impossible to perform and thus void as the designation of the arbitrator was integral to the arbitration provision. We consequently affirm. [2]


Apex makes payday loans [3] through its website, marketing using a testimonial it takes just “five full minutes to complete a straightforward online application.” (Appellee’s App. at 67.) The arbitration supply when you look at the loan contract provides “any and all sorts of claims. ادامه مطلب …