Summary
This document is a summary disposition order from the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals affirming the Circuit Court's decision to confirm in part and vacate in part a final arbitration award. The defendants-appellants challenged the arbitrator's determination of business ownership percentages, the conduct of the arbitration hearings, and the failure to postpone a hearing due to discovery disputes. The appellate court rejected these arguments, finding no statutory violations or abuse of discretion by the arbitrator, and ultimately affirmed the lower court's judgment.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the arbitrator exceeded his powers under HRS §658A‑23(a)(4) and violated public policy in determining ownership percentages.
- Whether the arbitrator conducted the arbitration hearing in violation of HRS §658A‑15.
- Whether the arbitrator violated HRS §658A‑23(a)(3) by failing to postpone the June 13, 2017 hearing.
Holdings
- The arbitrator did not exceed his statutory authority and no explicit, well‑defined public policy was shown to be violated; the lower court’s denial of vacatur is affirmed.
- The court found no abuse of discretion; the arbitrator’s advisement of a witness’s Fifth Amendment rights did not constitute a violation, and no error was preserved, so the denial of vacatur is affirmed.
- The arbitrator did not refuse a proper continuance request; no formal motion was filed, and the defendants offered no showing of prejudice, so the lower court’s decision is affirmed.
Key quotations
“There should be no 'second guessing' by the court of the arbitrator's interpretation of his or her authority so long as the arbitrator's interpretation could have rested on an interpretation and application of the agreement.”
Factual background
Debbie Eichelberger sued Randall Spear and Dan Jeffers asserting ownership and management claims over two bars, Arnold's Beach Bar and Grill and King's Pub. The parties agreed to arbitrate; the arbitrator awarded Eichelberger 75% ownership and ordered defendants to restore her as sole manager. Defendants later moved to vacate portions of the final award, alleging statutory and public‑policy violations.
Procedural history
The Circuit Court of the First Circuit entered a Confirmation Order on Jan. 24, 2022 granting in part and denying in part the defendants' motion to confirm and vacate the arbitrator's Final Award, and entered a Judgment on Apr. 5, 2022. The defendants appealed those orders to this intermediate appellate court.