Utah Court of Appeals hears challenge to arbitrator’s award after 2014 oral agreement came up at hearing

The Utah Court of Appeals heard oral argument in RV Holdings 4 v. WRSF Investment (case no. 20230882) about whether an arbitrator exceeded her authority by awarding damages tied to an alleged 2014 oral management agreement that the appellant says was not submitted or properly noticed in arbitration.

Christopher Bates, counsel for the appellant, told the three-judge panel that Ridgeview Capital (the appellee in the appeal) "made a tactical decision not to bring a claim for breach of a 2014 oral agreement" and instead pressed a claim under a 02/2006 agreement. Bates said the arbitrator ultimately awarded relief based on the 2014 agreement even though, he said, Ridgeview had denied that agreement existed and did not present evidence or a claim on that theory in its arbitration filings.

Why the court is watching: If the appellate court agrees with the appellant, it could narrow the circumstances in which courts will modify or vacate arbitration awards on the ground that an award was entered on a claim that was not submitted. Appellant counsel argued the Utah Arbitration Act and the parties’ incorporation of JAMS rules create a statutory and contractual limit on what arbitrators may award when a party never put a claim or the required JAMS…