As a construction litigation lawyer, dispute resolution is a recurring issue. It starts before the project begins at the time of contract negotiation, where the parties decide whether to require litigation or arbitration of their disputes. During project performance, disputes can often be addressed formally or informally. And after the project is completed, the real process begins: discussions, mediation, arbitration or litigation?

The Tennessee Court of Appeals recently decided a case that shows how arbitration and litigation can overlap. In Carbon Fiber Recycling, LLC v. Spahn (Oct. 2, 2025), a Tennessee company sued one of its members for misusing confidential information. The company asked the court for damages, an injunction, and to expel the member from the business. The trial court dismissed the case, reasoning that the operating agreement required arbitration in Delaware.

On appeal, the court agreed in part and disagreed in part. It held that the claims for damages and expulsion had to go to arbitration because of the contract language. But it also held that the trial court was wrong to dissolve the temporary restraining order. Even though arbitration was required, the company could still go to court for injunctive relief to stop ongoing harm while the arbitration process moved forward.