The arbitration clause applied to "any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to payments" by Medco Health Solutions to Chelsea Family Pharmacy.  

Chelsea sued Medco under a state statute, for breach of contract, and for unfair business practices. 

Chelsea alleged harm from Medco's failure to reimburse Chelsea enough for its services and from Medco's enforcement of a contract provision that limits Chelsea's ability to compete.

Does the arbitration clause cover the dispute?  Yes and no, the Tenth Circuit held yesterday.

The failure to reimburse theory, the court concluded, did "relat[e] to payments" by Medco.  But the gripe about limiting competition didn't.  That all three claims alleged both theories of harm didn't matter.  One kind of harm but not the other fit within the clause.  Chelsea Family Pharmacy PLLC v. Medco Health Solutions, Inc., No. 08-5103 (10th Cir. June 2, 2009).