1. Whether the district court erred in denying Defendant/Appellant, Jeffrey S. Weikum’s (“Weikum”), motion to compel arbitration because there was a dispute as to the terms of the agreement at issue.
2. Whether the district court erred in determining that the claims of Plaintiffs Rodney E. Pagel (“Pagel”) and Scott A. Hager (“Hager”) alleged in the complaint are not subject to arbitration under an agreement between Weikum, Pagel and Hager, and/or under North Dakota law, including North Dakota’s Uniform Arbitration Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 32-29.3.
3. Whether the district court erred in failing to comply with the requirements of North Dakota’s Uniform Arbitration Act, including N.D.C.C. § 32-29.3-07, by (a) improperly deciding the merits of the parties’ claims and that grounds for Weikum’s claim under the Agreement were not established, and (b) failing to stay all judicial proceedings until the district court made a final decision on whether the dispute must be submitted to arbitration.
4. Whether the district court erred in granting Pagel and Hager’s joint motion for summary judgment, including the district court’s interpretation and application of the parties’ agreement, and finding as a matter of law that there were no genuine issues of material fact.

1) Did the District Court appropriately deny Weikum’s Motion to Dismiss?
2) Did the District Court appropriately grant Pagel and Hager’s Motion for Summary Judgment?