1980). 35 . Blood, 68 P.3d at 1255 (citing S & R Co. of Kingston v. Latona Trucking, Inc., 159 F,3d 80, 83 (2d Cir. 1988)). 36 . Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 24, 103 S.Ct. 927, 74 L.Ed.2d 765 (1983); Blood, 68 P.3d at 1255 (citing Doctor’s Assocs. Inc. v. Distajo, 107 F.3d 126, 130 (2d Cir. 1997)). 37 . 9 U.S.C. § 3 (2012) (emphasis added). 38 . We disagree with the dissent’s analysis about what would have happened had Hudson actually raised a UTPA counterclaim in the collection litigation. If Hudson had raised the UTPA simply to defend and reduce t 11-310 CV, 2012 WL 506568, at *3-5 (Tex. App. Feb. 16, 2012) (applying federal law and finding waiver when the two claims were based on the same contract). 40 . Midwest Window Sys., Inc., 630 F.2d at 537 (<HOLDING>). 41 . PPG Indus., Inc., 128 F.3d at 110. 42 .
holding that tort claims were arbitrable because they arose out of and were related to contract holding claims waived because they all grew out of their unsatisfactory business relationship recognizing that without claim preclusion plaintiffs in small claims cases will not feel obligated to present all of their claims or all of their evidence  and they can simply file again  if need be holding that doctrine of affinity grew out of canonical maxim that marriage makes husband and wife one holding that employees claims against firm were not subject to mandatory arbitration because they did not arise out of business activities of either employee or firm but instead arose out of divorce agreement