Originally from:

Journal of American Arbitration (JAA) - Vol. 6, No. 2

Preview Page

ARTICLES

D.C. District Court Holds a Dismissal
Following Determination that Claims
Are Subject to Enforceable Arbitration
Agreement Is a “Judgment on the Merits”
for Res Judicata Purposes in Hobley v.
KFC U.S. Properties, Inc.
By Megan Michael

I. OVERVIEW
From June 6, 2001 until February 8, 2003, Plaintiff Reverend
Earnest Lee Hobley was employed as a manager at the fast food
chain Kentucky Fried Chicken (“KFC”). Hobley v. KFC U.S.
Props., Inc., 2006 WL249981, at *1 (D.D.C. Jan. 31, 2006).
Hobley resigned in 2003, after learning that he was going to be
demoted from his position as assistant unit manager. Id. Soon
thereafter, KFC filed a criminal complaint against Hobley upon
discovering that funds were missing from the store in which he
worked. Id. The District of Columbia police department
investigated the complaint and charged Hobley with first-degree
theft. After Hobley was ultimately acquitted of the theft charges,
Hobley, proceeding pro se, filed the following two civil actions
against KFC in superior court for wage and hour violations
concerning Hobley’s final paycheck and for false accusation
concerning Hobley’s arrest on charges of theft. Id.
KFC removed the cases to the United States District Court for
the District of Columbia, where the complaints were promptly
dismissed because both disputes were subject to a binding
arbitration agreement. Id. Hobley appealed the decision. While
the appeal was pending, Hobley filed eleven more complaints
against KFC in the state court alleging false arrest, malicious
prosecution, identity theft, defamation, forgery, and false
statements. Id. KFC again removed these actions and the district
court consolidated and stayed the actions pending the first appeal.
Id. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of
Hobley’s claims, holding that “torts committed after employment