|
An appellate court in Ohio held that a one year statutory time period for confirmation of an arbitration award is permissive, and held that an award should be confirmed where the moving party produces the award and a copy of the standard credit cardholder arbitration agreement and the opposing party does not move to vacate the award.
In NCO Portfolio Management Inc. v. Lewis, No. 06CA009001, 2007 WL 2229251 (Ohio Ct. App.9d Aug. 06, 2007), Janet and Kevin Lewis entered into a credit card agreement with MBNA which provided for binding arbitration of disputes. A dispute arose and arbitration culminated in an award in favor of MBNA's assignee NCO in early May of 2004.
Kevin Lewis answered NCO's attempts to confirm the award by denying that the award was enforceable against him. He claimed that he had never agreed to arbitrate his claims with NCO.
The trial court confirmed the award against Janet Lewis, but found that NCO had failed to provide proof of an agreement by Kevin Lewis to arbitrate his claim. The trial court dismissed the case with prejudice as to Kevin Lewis. NCO appealed.
Initially, this Court held that the trial court acted within its discretion in reviewing NCO's motion to confirm in spite of the late filing.
The language of the statute indicates that the one year time period "may" be applied. This permissive language grants discretion to the court regarding application of the one year time frame if filing is made within a reasonable time, good cause is demonstrated, and no prejudice occurs to the opposing party as a result of the late filing.
Here, Lewis failed to show prejudice caused by the late filing in the trial court. Thus, this Court declined to address the argument on appeal.
NCO argued that the trial court abused its discretion when it dismissed with prejudice its motion to confirm the arbitration award.
The Court agreed with NCO that it had produced the necessary documentation to seek confirmation of the arbitration award. NCO produced the award and a copy of the standard credit cardholder agreement. Though it was unsigned by Lewis, its credibility was supported in NCO's attorney's affidavit.
Accordingly, as Lewis did not move to vacate, modify, or correct the award, the Court was required to confirm the award.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|