|
A federal district court in Kentucky confirmed an arbitration award that entitled a former employee to severance pay, rejecting the employer’s challenge to the arbitrator’s factual findings.
In Bradley v. Louisville Communications, LLC, No. 3:05CV-734-H, 2006 WL 2620183 (W.D. Ky. Sep. 11, 2006), Bradley moved for confirmation of an arbitration award that required his former employer, Louisville Communications (the Company), to give him severance pay totaling $195,700. In opposing the motion, the Company argued that the arbitrator “made mistakes of undisputed fact” and failed to make some necessary factual determinations.
The Court began its analysis by citing the principle that “review of the arbitration award is extremely limited” while noting that an arbitration award may be vacated if the arbitrator acted in “manifest disregard of the law.”
The Court determined that the arbitrator acted within her authority even though some factual issues were left undecided because “the factual issues that the Arbitrator did decide [were] sufficient to support the award.” In reaching this conclusion, the Court refused to examine whether the arbitration award was correctly decided, but affirmed that the evidence was sufficient to support the conclusion reached.
Pursuant to a Kentucky statute, Bradley requested interest on the award from the date of the arbitrator’s decision. The Court held that arbitration awards are not a “federal judgment” that would trigger statutory interest. However, the Court did award pre-judgment interest because the amount of Bradley’s claim was liquidated the same day that the arbitration award was issued, and “[u]nder Kentucky law, interest on a liquidated claim follows as a matter of right.”
The Court rejected the Company’s challenge, confirmed the arbitration award, and awarded Bradley pre-judgment interest.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|