Robert A. Harris v. Michael Dazzo

No. 3D25-0825 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 13, 2025) · Third District Court of Appeal of Florida · August 13, 2025 · No. 3D25-0825

Summary

The Third District Court of Appeal of Florida granted Robert A. Harris’s petition for a writ of certiorari and quashed the order denying his motion to dismiss. The court held that Florida’s arbitral-immunity statute provides arbitrators with absolute immunity from suit for conduct undertaken in their capacity as arbitrators, including the alleged misconduct described in the complaint. The court concluded that the allegations, although framed as breach of an arbitration oath and contract, concerned acts integrally related to the arbitration proceeding.

Court
Third District Court of Appeal of Florida
Writing for the Court
Gooden, J.; Fernandez, J.; Miller, J.
Jurisdiction
Third District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decision date
August 13, 2025
Docket number
3D25-0825
Procedural posture
Harris petitioned for a common-law writ of certiorari challenging the circuit court's order denying his motion to dismiss Dazzo's breach-of-contract and fraudulent-inducement claims on the ground of arbitral immunity.
Standard of review
Common-law certiorari review; the petitioner had to show a departure from the essential requirements of law, material injury, and harm that could not be corrected on plenary appeal. The court reviewed the complaint's allegations to determine whether Harris was acting in his capacity as an arbitrator.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Robert A. Harris v. Michael Dazzo
Disposition
quashed

Topics

writ of certiorariarbitrationappellate procedurecivil procedurecommercial litigation

Practice areas

appellate procedurearbitrationcivil procedurecommercial litigationcontracts

Questions Presented

  1. Whether certiorari review was available from an order denying a motion to dismiss based on arbitral immunity.
  2. Whether section 682.051, Florida Statutes, grants arbitrators absolute immunity from suit for conduct performed in their capacity as arbitrators.
  3. Whether allegations that an arbitrator acted in bad faith, with malice, or incompetently, and breached an arbitration oath or agreement, defeat arbitral immunity when the alleged conduct occurred during and was integrally related to the arbitration.

Holdings

  1. Certiorari relief is available to review an order denying dismissal on an absolute-immunity ground because forcing an immune defendant to defend the suit constitutes irreparable harm that cannot be remedied on plenary appeal.
  2. Section 682.051(1), Florida Statutes, grants an arbitrator absolute immunity from civil liability to the same extent as a judge acting in a judicial capacity; the immunity is immunity from suit rather than merely a defense to liability.
  3. Harris acted in his capacity as an arbitrator because the alleged exclusion of panel members, failure to review submissions, control of conferences and deadlines, circulation of orders, and other challenged conduct occurred during and was integrally related to the arbitration.
  4. Allegations of bad faith, malice, incompetence, or breach of an arbitration oath or agreement do not overcome absolute arbitral immunity when the challenged conduct was performed in the arbitrator's capacity.

Key quotations

The writ functions as a safety net and gives the upper court the prerogative to reach down and halt a miscarriage of justice where no other remedy exists. (5)
At bottom, arbitral immunity is absolute in nature. It is immunity from suit. (10-11)
Our review leads us to one conclusion—these allegations fall squarely within Harris’ role as an arbitrator. (12-13)
Harris’ immunity is not overcome by allegations of bad faith, malice, or incompetence, such as these. (13)

Factual background

The owners of Alternative Global Management, LLC agreed to dissolve the company and required disputes to be resolved before a three-member American Arbitration Association panel. Harris was selected as the neutral chair and executed an AAA oath promising, among other things, impartiality, confidentiality, and efficient management of the arbitration. After disputes arose, Dazzo alleged that Harris engaged in biased and procedurally improper conduct during the arbitration, and the AAA removed Harris from the panel. Dazzo then sued Harris for breach of contract and fraudulent inducement based on the alleged violation of the oath and the parties' agreement.

Procedural history

Dazzo sued Harris in the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County after the American Arbitration Association removed Harris from an arbitration panel. Harris moved to dismiss under section 682.051, Florida Statutes, asserting absolute arbitral immunity. The circuit court denied the motion, relying in part on decisions from other jurisdictions. The Third District granted certiorari and quashed the order.

Remand instructions

The order denying Harris's motion to dismiss was quashed. The court stated that Harris was entitled to absolute immunity and that the lawsuit should be dismissed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…