From Gallagher v. Pepe Auto Group et al, 18-cv-3433, 2019 WL 801955 (SDNy Feb. 21, 2019):
Here, the arbitration agreement, which provides, “Any dispute under this Agreement shall be resolved by binding arbitration,” is broad. Therefore, there is a presumption of arbitrability regarding plaintiff’s claims that arise under the Employment Agreement. Those claims include plaintiff’s discrimination claims under the ADEA, OWBPA, and NYSHRL, as well as plaintiff’s claims for breach of contract, wrongful discharge, and breach of fiduciary duty (the “arbitrable claims”).
But plaintiff’s post-termination claims do not fall under the arbitration clause. They require examination of different evidence and do not require interpretation of or reference to the Employment Agreement. Cf. Genesco, Inc. v. T. Kakiuchi & Co., Ltd., 815 F.2d at 856 (holding claim that defendants tortuously interfered with plaintiff’s contractual relationship with one of its officers did not arise under or relate to sales agreement between the parties). Indeed, “[t]here is nothing to indicate that … [the parties] could reasonably have expected, or even contemplated, that that clause would extend” to plaintiff’s post-termination claims.