Trial court vacated an arbitration award, and now the court of appeals vacates the trial court order because it “hinges on unsupported findings.”  We believe appellate courts should be more magnanimous with trial courts even when wrong and avoid calling a ruling unhinged. Contractor sued subcontractor for failure to complete its work including damages for delayed completion. The parties agreed to arbitration. Contractor produced a ton of documents but objected to producing others. A few days before the arbitration, subcontractor raised the discovery issue. Arbitration went forward as scheduled, and the arbitrator issued an award that addressed the nondisclosure arguments and penalized the contractor for failing to disclose information on the delay damages. The arbitrator, nonetheless, awarded contractor damages based on subcontractor’s abandonment of work plus fees and costs. Contractor moved to confirm the arbitration award, and subcontractor objected. The superior court vacated the arbitration award based on the nondisclosure. Court of appeals holds challenging an arbitration award requires more than a late argument on nondisclosure. Challenger must point to corruption, fraud, or undue means. While A.R.S. 12-3023(A)(3) permits a trial court to vacate an arbitration award if the arbitrator refused to postpone the hearing on showing of sufficient cause, subcontractor never requested a postponement. There was some dispute on this, but under the AAA rules, subcontractor waived its request by not objecting in writing. Regardless, the arbitrator acted within his discretion by proceeding with the hearing.

link to opinion