The defendants, Daniel Keating, Ruth Reed, Dennis M. DeSpain, Terry L. DeSpain and Charles Smith III, brought a consolidated appeal to the Appellate Court claiming that the trial court improperly had granted the applications of the plaintiff, Doctor's Associates, Inc., to compel arbitration and denied their motions to dismiss and motions to stay. Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. Keating, 72 Conn.App. 310, 311-12, 805 A.2d 120 (2002). The Appellate Court affirmed the judgments of the trial court. Id., 318. We granted the defendants' petition for certification, limited to the following
The relevant facts and procedural history are set forth in the opinion of the Appellate Court. "This case concerns the authority of the Superior Court to enforce an arbitration clause in a franchise agreement. As part of the arbitration clause, the parties agreed that arbitration would take place in Bridgeport, Connecticut. The franchisor brought four applications in the Superior Court to compel the franchisees to arbitrate. All but one of the franchisees are residents of Florida. . . . The franchisees have appealed from the court's granting of the franchisor's applications for orders requiring the franchisees to proceed with arbitration in Bridgeport. We affirm the judgments of the court.
"The plaintiff, Doctor's Associates, Inc., is the franchisor of numerous Subway sandwich shops around the country. It is a Florida corporation that has its principal place of business in Fort Lauderdale. The defendant Daniel Keating is a present or former Subway franchisee in this state. The defendants Ruth Reed, Dennis M. DeSpain, Terry L. DeSpain and Charles Smith III (Florida defendants) are or have been Subway franchisees in Florida.
"Having filed a proper demand for arbitration with the American Arbitration Association, the plaintiff sought court orders compelling the defendants to proceed with arbitration. See General Statutes § 52-410; 9 U.S.C. § 2. In accordance with the forum selected in each of the franchise agreements, it asked the court to designate Bridgeport as the venue for the arbitration.
Our examination of the record and briefs and our consideration of the parties' oral arguments before this court persuade us that the judgment of the Appellate Court should be affirmed. We take judicial notice of the following facts: (1) the American Arbitration Association Commercial Arbitration Rules, by which the defendants agreed to be bound in their franchise agreement, allow service of process on a party's representative;
The judgment of the Appellate Court is affirmed.