A Texas appellate court reversed the confirmation of an arbitration award, holding that an arbitration award must be properly admitted as evidence in order to support confirmation of the award.

In Gruber v. CACV of Colorado, LLC, No. 05-07-00379-CV, 2008 WL 867459 (Tex. Ct. App.-Dallas, Apr. 02, 2008), Frank Gruber had an arbitration award admitted against him, which was confirmed by the trial court. Gruber appealed the trial court's confirmation of the award, claiming that suitable evidence of the award had not been presented.

This Court agreed with Gruber. CACV submitted only a copy of the arbitration award.

First, although CACV requested that judicial notice be taken of the copy, it was not "suitable for judicial notice… [as s]imply attaching a document to a pleading does not make the document admissible as evidence." See Tex. R. Evid. 201.

Second, CACV did not show foundation for the copy, such as a business records affidavit, or submit proof that it was self-authenticating. Accordingly, this Court agreed that the evidence was not sufficient to confirm an arbitration award and reversed the trial court.

The Court's decision does not align well with either the Federal Arbitration Act or the Texas Arbitration Act. Section 13 of the Federal Arbitration Act requires a party seeking to confirm an award to file the award "with the clerk for the entry of judgment thereon." Section 9 of the FAA requires courts to confirm an arbitration award "unless the award is vacated, modified, or corrected as prescribed in sections 10 and 11" of the FAA. There is no requirement to otherwise establish a foundation for the admissibility of the award, and courts have been reluctant to require similar technicalities. See Schmidt v. Pacific Benefit Services, Inc., 150 P. 3d 810 (Haw. 2006) (the validity of an arbitration award is determined by examining whether it is final, and the fact that arbitrator's signature on the award was not notarized did not render the award invalid.); Virginia Beach Bd. of Realtors, Inc. v. Goodman Segar Hogan, Inc., 299 S.E.2d 360 (Va. 1983) ("when an otherwise valid award contains the signature of the chairman of the arbitration panel, it should not be invalidated merely because it lacks the signature of each arbitrator. To do so would elevate form over substance.").

Under the Texas Arbitration Act, "[t]he arbitrators shall deliver a copy of the award to each party personally, by registered or certified mail, or as provided in the agreement." TX CIV PRAC & REM § 171.053 (b) (emphasis added). To require a party to authenticate an original award--or require an arbitrator to testify to establish a foundation for an award--in order to confirm goes beyond what arbitrators are required to provide to parties in the first instance under the Texas Arbitration Act. What remains unclear from the decision is whether it expected any additional affidavits to come from the party seeking to confirm the award or the arbitrator.