Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

COURT ANNEXED ARBITRATION—AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY—JUDIClAL ERROR—DUE PROCESS—ARBITRATOR MISCONDUCT—APPEAL DE NOVO—OHIO

The trial court did not err in referring a case to compulsory arbitration because the amount in controversy was greater than the statutory ceiling for such arbitration cases, and the arbitrators were not guilty of misconduct for proceeding with the case although a motion to stay arbitration was pending. Kuenzer filed a tort action against his union and several of its agents, requesting a jury trial. The trial court, after a pretrial conference, referred the case to arbitration. The plaintiff objected, and filed a motion to stay because he sought $75,000 in actual and punitive damages, and the ceiling for arbitration by the courts is $10,000. Hearings were held despite the plaintiff's failure to appear, and the arbitrators dismissed the case. The Ohio Supreme Court held that, absent a showing of abuse of discretion by the trial court, there was no reversible error. It also ruled that none of the plaintiff's substantive rights were violated because the arbitration award was appealable in the form of a trial de novo. The court further addressed the plaintiff's claim that the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct because they failed to defer the hearing pending a ruling on his motion to stay arbitration before the court. It ruled that the pendency of his motion to remove was not a valid basis for a stay of the arbitral proceedings. Two dissenting justices stated that "[t]he irregular, unauthorized procedure and action of the common pleas court, further embroidered by an arbitration proceeding (or the abortion thereof) constitutes a shortcut which nullifies plaintiff's inviolable constitutional rights to a jury trial and due process of law."

Kuenzer v. Teamsters Union Local 507, 420 N.E.2d 1009 (Ohio 1981).