The First District considered a case where, between 1987-1993, the parties entered into several contracts with broad arbitration clauses. Eleven years later, in 2004, they enter into another contract which "supplements but does not replace" the prior contracts. That later contract does not include an arbitration clause. A dispute ensues and the issue arises whether the court should compel arbitration.

The case is Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. and Health Options v. University of Florida Board of Trustees, University of Florida College of Dentistry (Roberts, Kahn, and Thomas).

The Court investigated whether the dispute over the 2004 contract still nonetheless triggered the arbitration provisions in the prior contracts. In short, the court was investigated prong 2 of the Seifert agreement, to wit, whether an arbitrable agreement existed.

The Panel determined that the parties had not sought a declaratory judgment regarding the prior contracts NOR did any party allege a violation of the prior contracts. Moreover, the Panel concluded that the matter could be resolved without reliance or reference to the prior contracts. Arbitration was therefore denied.