Court: Supreme Court of Alabama; May 31, 2013; Alabama; State Supreme Court
Guardian Builders, LLC and Wayne Tackett appeal an order that denied their motion to vacate or modify an arbitration award favoring Randy and Melissa Uselton. The background includes the Useltons suing Guardian in April 2010 over construction claims, followed by Guardian's successful motion to compel arbitration in October 2010. The arbitrator issued a final award on December 21, 2011, requiring Guardian to pay $452,275.20. Guardian sought to vacate or modify this award on January 11, 2012. Subsequently, the Useltons filed a motion to confirm the award, leading to a circuit court order on May 31, 2012, that denied Guardian’s motion and confirmed the arbitration award, also ordering Guardian to pay $1,421.75 in fees.
The Useltons moved to dismiss Guardian’s appeal, arguing non-compliance with Rule 71B of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, which outlines the appeal process for arbitration awards. Key requirements include filing a notice of appeal within 30 days of receiving the arbitration award, submitting supporting documents, and serving the appeal correctly. The court emphasized that failure to adhere to these procedural rules constitutes a waiver of the right to appeal. The appellate court ultimately vacated the order and dismissed the appeal, indicating procedural deficiencies on Guardian's part.
An appeal from the grant or denial of a Rule 59 motion regarding an arbitration award must follow specific procedures outlined in Rule 71B. A party must file a notice of appeal with the circuit court within 30 days after receiving notice of the arbitration award. The circuit court clerk will then enter the award as a final judgment. Before further appellate review, the aggrieved party must file a Rule 59 motion to set aside or vacate the judgment. The circuit court's decision on this motion can be appealed to the appropriate appellate court. Notably, a party loses the right to appellate review of an arbitration award if they fail to file both the notice of appeal and the Rule 59 motion within the specified time.
In the case at hand, Guardian did not file a formal notice of appeal but instead submitted a motion to vacate or modify the arbitration award within the 30-day period. The Useltons argue that this action does not constitute a valid appeal. Guardian contends that the motion should be viewed as both a notice of appeal and a Rule 59 motion, referencing the precedent set in J.L. Loper Construction Co. v. Findout Partnership, LLP. In Loper, the court allowed the absence of a formal notice of appeal, recognizing other motions as sufficient for appellate review. The current court may similarly interpret Guardian's motion as a notice of appeal, especially since it included the arbitration award and served notice to the Useltons. However, the court advises adherence to the explicit procedural requirements of Rule 71B to prevent confusion in future cases. Additional procedural issues related to the appeal of the arbitration award are also to be addressed.
After Guardian's appeal to the circuit court to vacate or modify the arbitration award, the clerk failed to enter the arbitration award as the court's judgment, violating Rule 71B(f). This rule mandates that the clerk promptly enter the award as the final judgment following the filing of a notice of appeal. Rule 71B, effective February 1, 2009, superseded the previous procedure under Ala.Code 1975, 6-6-15. Despite similarities between the two procedures, compliance with Rule 71B(f) is crucial, as established in prior cases like Parham v. American Bankers Insurance Co. of Florida, where failure to enter the award resulted in a lack of jurisdiction, rendering the subsequent court order void. Similarly, under Rule 71B(f), without the clerk's entry of the arbitration award as the judgment, the circuit court's order denying Guardian's motion is also void. Consequently, the court vacates the order and dismisses the appeal. After Guardian's motion, the Useltons filed a "motion to confirm" the award.
The circuit court issued an order denying Guardian’s motion to vacate or modify an arbitration award while simultaneously granting the Useltons’ motion to confirm the award, entering a judgment for which execution could issue. The Useltons appeared to rely on Rule 71C of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows any party to enforce an arbitration award if no appeal has been filed within thirty days. However, Guardian had filed an appeal under Rule 71B, making Rule 71C inapplicable for the entry of judgment on the award. Consequently, the circuit court lacked authority to confirm the award or to award Better Business Bureau fees and facility costs associated with it. Guardian's motion is treated as a notice of appeal, leaving the appeal pending in the circuit court as the award was never formally entered as a judgment. The circuit court's May 31, 2012, order is thus vacated, and the appeal is dismissed, with the judges concurring on the decision.
