Originally from Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation

PAGE PREVIEW

In Part I last month, ADR attorney-neutral Roger Jacobs discussed the development of arbitration appellate practices and laid out provider rules. He concludes his two-part article here with analysis, commentary, and practice application.

* * *

Under all three of the protocols presented and discussed in Part 1 last month—the Arbitration Appeal Procedure by the CPR Institute, Alternatives’ publisher; JAMS’ Optional Arbitration Appeal Procedure, and the American Arbitration Association’s Optional Appellate Arbitration Rules (see “Examining the Elusiveness of Finality in Arbitration and the New Avenues of Appeal,” 33 Alternatives 1 (January 2015))—further appeal pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act is not precluded. 

Commentators have opined on various aspects of these new appeal procedures. The NP Now and Next International Arbitration Alert, published by the law firm Nixon Peabody, in discussing the AAA Appellate Procedures, said that “Nixon Peabody arbitration practitioners are highly skeptical, and project that the process will likely take many months to a year or more to complete.” (The Nov. 15, 2013 blog post is available here: http://bit.ly/1AiFECR.) concluded that while the process might “afford potential relief from an award that is wrong as a factual or legal matter” it could also lead to “delays in the finality of awards.”