Arbitration Award, Michigan Court of Appeals Clarifies Time to Confirm

The Michigan Court of Appeals recently clarified the deadline for confirming an arbitration award.  

In Greater Bethesda Healing Springs Ministry v Evangel Builders & Construction Managers, LLC, 282 Mich App 410 (2009), the Michigan Court of Appeals, explained that MCR 3.602(I) requires only that an arbitration award be filed with the court clerk within one year after the award was rendered, and has no bearing on the time period in which the award may be confirmed and entered as a judgment by the court. 

Prior to this case, courts had interpreted this court rule as requiring a party to confirm an arbitration award within one year from award. 

Click here for a copy of the slip opinion in this case. 

Panel to Consider Arbitration Post-Hall Street Associates

On October 6, 2008, the ABA's Section on Public Contracts is sponsoring a Panel Discussion concerning the Supreme Court's ruling in Hall Street Associates v Mattel, ___ U.S. ___ (2008) and its impact on arbitration in federal procurement cases. We first reported on the Hall Street decision here.

The panel includes:

• Donald P. Armadas, a former Judge at the ASBCA who now serves as an arbitrator and mediator;
• Judge Paul Williams, Chairman, Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals: and,
• Frederick J. Lees, Professor Emeritus, George Washington University School of Law.
  

The panel will discuss the limitations on judicial review of arbitration awards, and the ways in which arbitration can be made more time and cost efficient.

To participate in this event, or to obtain materials from the Public Contract Section website afterwards, click here.

Supreme Court Limits Grounds for Reviewing Arbitration Awards Under FAA

On March 25, 2008, in a 6-3 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Sections 10 and 11 of the Federal Arbitration Act provide the exclusive grounds for vacating or modifying an arbitration award.

Contractual arbitration agreements providing for judicial review broader than the grounds in the FAA are not unenforceable under the FAA, the Court held. Rather, when the FAA is invoked, a court "must" confirm an arbitration award unless it finds that one of the grounds set out in Sections 10 and 11 for vacating or modifying awards is applicable.

Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., No. 06-989, 552 U.S. ___, 2008 WL 762537 (March 25, 2008).

Because the particular arbitration at issue was part of a U.S. District Court trial, the Supreme Court remanded the case for determination of whether the arbitration agreement, as drafted, should be enforceable not under the FAA but under the U.S. District Court's inherent authority to manage its own cases. The Supreme Court also declined to extend its holding outside the realm of the FAA, noting that its ruling did not apply to enforcement under state statutes or the common law.