|
A federal district court in New York upheld an arbitration award over objection that the arbitrator exceeded his powers by not holding an evidentiary hearing. In upholding the award, the Court explained that fundamental fairness does not require an evidentiary hearing.
In Wise v. Marriott International, Inc., No. 06 CIV. 11439, 2007 WL 2780395 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 24, 2007), Wise filed an arbitration claim against Marriott, his former employer, alleging discrimination on the basis of race and sexual orientation. At arbitration, the arbitrator issued an award granting Marriott’s motion for summary judgment.
Wise filed a motion to vacate the award, arguing that the arbitrator exceeded his powers by not holding an evidentiary hearing. In addressing this argument, the Court first looked to the applicable arbitration rules. As the Court noted, the rules provided for an evidentiary hearing, but they also provided that a failure to object in writing constitutes a waiver of an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, Wise waived an evidentiary hearing by participating, without objection, in the summary judgment proceedings.
Moreover, the Court rejected Wise’s argument that fundamental fairness required an evidentiary hearing. In rejecting this argument, the Court explained that, “it can hardly be the case that an arbitral award made on a written submission, where the parties had discretion to present the arbitrators with any information they thought relevant, including written sworn testimony if they wished, violates due process or denies fundamental fairness.”
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|