Malted Mousse, Inc. v. Steinmetz

Summary

The Supreme Court of Washington held that trial de novo is the exclusive method for obtaining judicial review of an adverse decision in mandatory arbitration under chapter 7.06 RCW. Constitutional and statutory writs of certiorari are unavailable when trial de novo provides an adequate remedy, and the respondent's request for a partial trial de novo was ineffective because it did not comply with the mandatory arbitration rules. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for entry of judgment consistent with the original arbitration award.

Holdings

1. Trial de novo is the sole method for seeking judicial review of an erroneous ruling in a mandatory arbitration proceeding under chapter 7.06 RCW.
2. The procedures and standards governing review of private arbitration awards under chapter 7.04 RCW may not be applied to mandatory arbitration proceedings under chapter 7.06 RCW.
3. The manifest procedural error standard does not apply to mandatory arbitration proceedings under chapter 7.06 RCW.
4. A request for a partial trial de novo limited to attorney fees is ineffective because MAR 7.1 requires a trial de novo on all issues of law and fact.
5. Malted Mousse was not entitled to attorney fees on appeal because Steinmetz's appeal was not frivolous.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a party aggrieved by an erroneous ruling in a mandatory arbitration proceeding under chapter 7.06 RCW may obtain judicial review through a constitutional writ of certiorari rather than a trial de novo.
2. Whether a party may request a partial trial de novo limited to attorney fees in a mandatory arbitration proceeding.
3. Whether the Court should award Malted Mousse attorney fees under RAP 18.9(a) on the ground that Steinmetz's appeal was frivolous.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded