Thomson, Bohrer, Werth & Razook v. Multi Restaurant Concepts, Inc. (561 So. 2d 615, 1990)

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See, e.g., PaineWebber, Inc. v. Hess, 497 So.2d 1323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Fischer v. Rodriguez-Capriles, 472 So.2d 1315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Wood-Hopkins Contracting Co. v. C.H. Barco Contracting Co., 301 So.2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); G & N Const. Co. v. Kirpatovsky, 181 So.2d 664 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966).

NESBITT and BASKIN, JJ., concur.

GERSTEN, Judge

(dissenting).

I respectfully dissent. I believe the provision in question is clear and I would reverse and remand for arbitration.