Andrew Reitz established a trust in 2000, naming his sons, James and John, as sole beneficiaries and himself as trustee. Upon Andrew’s death, Hal Rachal Jr., the attorney who drafted the trust, became the successor trustee. In 2009, John Reitz sued Rachal, alleging that Rachal had misappropriated trust assets and failed to provide an accounting to the beneficiaries. Rachal moved to compel arbitration under the trust’s arbitration provision. The district court denied Rachal’s motion, arguing that a binding arbitration agreement must arise out of a contract between two parties, and neither James nor John agreed to including the provision in the trust. Rachal appealed. Do you agree with the district court’s ruling?