A disappointed party cannot challenge an arbitration award on the grounds that no agreement to arbitrate existed once the statutory time limit for motions to vacate or modify has passed, according to a Louisiana appellate court.

In NCO Portfolio Management Inc. v. Gougisha, No. 07-CA-604, 2007 WL 4553933, (La. Ct. App. Dec. 27, 2007), NCO filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award for amounts owed to MBNA Bank by Gougisha. After asking for and being granted additional time to respond to the motion, Gougisha failed to respond, and the trial court entered a default judgment confirming the award.

On appeal, Gougisha claimed that NCO had failed to present evidence that any agreement to arbitration was executed.

Affirming the trial court order, the Court held that Gougisha's challenge to the award's confirmation was untimely and must be rejected. The Court observed that Gougisha failed to move to vacate or modify the award within the applicable three month statutory period and did not contest the award until after it was confirmed.

According to the Court, the trial court's factual findings - including the existence of an agreement to arbitrate - could not be set aside under the circumstances, "regardless of whether [the judgment] was obtained via a default or ordinary judgment."