of privately made agreements to arbitrate and its second purpose is to encourage efficient and speedy resolution of disputes); see also Maynard E. Pirsig, Some Comments on Arbitration Legislation and the Uniform Act, 10 Vand. L.Rev. 685, 691 (1957) (stating purpose of arbitration law is to make agreement to arbitrate effective and to effectuate that purpose it enlists aid of court by simple non-teehnical and summary procedure that safeguards parties against claims for arbitration not warranted by their agreement). Under these circumstances, the trial court correctly ordered Ottman to submit his claim to arbitration because his post-resignation defamation claim “arises out of’ the employment relationship. See, e.g., Fleck v. E.F. Hutton Group, Inc., 891 F.2d 1047, 1053 (2d Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); Zolezzi v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 789
holding that a defamation claim is a personal injury tort claim holding that a defamation claim based on statements in a written disciplinary notice was preempted holding that online service provider was immune from defamation claim based on inaccurate stock information holding as arbitrable posttermination defamation claim based on statement that stockbroker was basically a criminal holding as arbitrable posttermination defamation claim based on statement that stockbroker had a drinking problem