Trial Judge Properly Concluded She Did Not Have Jurisdiction To Award Fees Under Unique Circumstances.
In a case where the arbitrator and court tossed an attorney’s fees request like a “hot potato,” the prevailing party eventually lost a challenge to obtain fees for not trying to get before the arbitrator or appealing the court determination on the post-arbitration judgment.
Miceli v. Staples, Inc., Case No D070676 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 20, 2016) (unpublished), involved an interesting back-and-forth situation on a fees request between the arbitrator and the trial court.
A contractual fees clause allowed fee recovery to the prevailing party in an arbitration proceeding, but the arbitrator was vested with authority to so award. At the conclusion of the arbitration, the arbitrator issued an award denying claimant’s claims and stating the respondent was entitled to recovery fees and expenses in conjunction with the defense of the arbitration. However, the award did not specify a dollar amount of fees and expenses, but separately ordered claimant to reimburse $1,150 in AAA fees. Respondent filed a fee/costs application before arbitrator, who ruled that the “more appropriate avenue” was to have the fee request submitted as part of the trial court arbitration confirmation process. Sixteen days later, and two months after the award, the arbitrator responded by stating his jurisdiction over the matter had expired. At the post-award confirmation hearing, claimant argued that the trial judge did not have jurisdiction to make a fee award, with the lower court striking the AAA expense award and confirming the merits aspect against claimant but refusing to acknowledge whether the court would entertain a fees motion independently. Soon, the trial court confirmed the merits award, but struck the language regarding fees and expenses, entering a judgment never appealed by the respondent requesting fees/expenses. Two months later, respondent filed a fee motion and costs memorandum before the trial court, which denied the requests based on the theory that jurisdiction rested with the arbitrator to make such awards.
The appellate court affirmed the fee/expense denial. Given that the arbitrator had sole jurisdiction to award fees, respondent wanting fees should have (1) asked for the arbitrator to correct or remand before its time to do so expired, (2) asked the court to correct or remand to the arbitrator to add fees, and/or (3) appealed the resulting judgment no matter what the trial court ruled.
Comments