COMPUTER TASK GROUP, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
PALM BEACH COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Computer Task Group appeals a final judgment confirming an arbitration award made against Palm Beach County. The court affirmed the arbitrator's award, holding that arbitrators' findings are entitled to a high degree of conclusiveness and may not be vacated for errors of law.
The court affirmed the arbitration award, holding that the arbitrator had authority to award damages under the contract and that errors of law by an arbitrator are not reviewable. The court found no fraud and no abuse of discretion in the trial court's denial of appellant's fraud contentions. The awards of attorney's fees and costs were proper because the arbitrator had evidence supporting the fees and reasonably interpreted the contract regarding allowable costs.
[1] Arbitration awards are entitled to a high degree of conclusiveness and may not be vacated for errors of law.
[2] An arbitrator exceeds their powers only by going beyond the authority granted by the parties or the operative documents.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Arbitrators' awards may not be vacated on the ground that the arbitrator made an error of law.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that errors of law by arbitrators are not reviewable grounds for vacation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceComputer Task Group and Palm Beach County submitted their dispute to arbitration under a contract. The arbitrator issued an award that included damage…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Arbitrator Exceeding Powers cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the final judgment confirming the arbitration award made in this case. In considering appellant’s contentions, we are mindful of the “high degree of conclusiveness” which should be attached to the arbitrator’s findings. Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327, 1328-9 (Fla.1989). Arbitrators’ awards may not be vacated on the ground that the arbitrator made an error of law. See id. at 1329; Cochran v. Broward County Police Benev. Ass’n, 693 So. 2d 134, 135 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). The arbitrator is the sole judge of the facts and the weight to be given to the evidence. See City of West Palm Beach v. Palm Beach County Police Benev. Ass’n, 387 So. 2d 533, 534 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
Appellant claims that the arbitrator exceeded his powers in awarding certain types of damages. An arbitrator exceeds his powers only by going “beyond the authority granted by the parties or the operative documents.... ” Applewhite v. Sheen Fin. Res., Inc., 608 So. 2d 80, 83 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
Under federal authority, which would apply to the contract in this case, the test for whether an arbitrator exceeds his authority is whether the arbitrator had the power, based on the parties’ submissions or the arbitration agreement, to reach a certain issue, not whether the arbitrator correctly decided that issue. DiRussa v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., 121 F. 3d 818, 824 (2d Cir.1997); Cassedy v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 751 So. 2d 143, 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
In this case, the arbitrator had the authority to award damages under the contract. Even if he made an error of law in awarding some of the damages, a point we do not decide, we do not review his errors of law, if any.
Moreover, we conclude that none of the awards were arbitrary and capricious. See World Inv. Corp. v. Breen, 684 So. 2d 221, 222 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)(“An arbitration award may be vacated on the non-statutory ground that it is arbitrary and capricious.”).
While appellant contends that the award was procured by fraud, a valid ground to vacate the award, appellant has failed to prove the fraud. Although it points to testimony of county employees which it claims was misleading, the court reviewed these contentions at a lengthy hearing and denied them. We conclude that there was no abuse of discretion, nor was there any clear and convincing evidence of fraud.
Finally, with respect to the award of attorney’s fees, we affirm based on City of Boca Raton v. Faith Baptist Church of Boca Raton, Inc., 423 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).
We reject the contention that the arbitrator acted without any evidence that the fees were reasonable. The arbitrator had evidence of the amount of the fees and the method of calculation, and he is the sole judge of the evidence and weight to be given to it. See Palm Beach County Police Benev. Ass’n, 387 So. 2d at 534. As to the costs awarded, some of the objections made on appeal were not made to the arbitrator. With respect to the remaining objections, appellant simply disagrees with the arbitrator’s interpretation of the contract.
However, ‘the scope of [our] judicial review is limited to determining whether or not the interpretation of the contractual language is reasonably debatable.’ Id. at 535 (quoting Kearny PBA Local No. 21 v. Town of Kearny, 81 N.J. 208, 405 A. 2d 393, 399-400 (1979)).
We find that the arbitrator’s interpretation was reasonably debatable in determining what costs could be awarded.
Affirmed.
WARNER, C.J., GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
T. Stevens Felger, M.D. and North Florida Surgeons, P. A. v. Mock, 65 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…appears that the trial court simply disagreed with the arbitrator’s application of the law to the facts of this case. That, however, is not a sufficient basis to set aside this arbitration proceeding.”); Computer Task Grp., Inc. v. Palm Beach Cnty., 782 So. 2d 942, 943 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“[T]he arbitrator had the authority to award damages under the contract. Even if he made an error of law in awarding some of the damages, a point we do not decide, we do not review his errors of law, if any.”); Charbonneau…
-
Computer Task Grp., Inc. v. Palm Beach Cnty., 809 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…an order taxing appellate attorney’s fees. We affirm the award and write to address one issue raised by CTG. On April 4, 2001, this court affirmed a final judgment confirming an arbitration award. See Computer Task Group, Inc. v. Palm Beach County, 782 So. 2d 942 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). On the same day, we granted Palm Beach County’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees and directed the trial court to determine the amount of fees upon remand, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400(b). On June 26…
-
Inversiones Y Procesadora Tropical Inprotsa, S.A. v. DEL Monte Int'l GMBH, 921 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2019)…CIO v. Shaw Envt’l & Infrastructure, Inc., 837 F. 3d 1083, 1088 (11th Cir. 2016) (holding that an arbitrator does not exceed its authority by incorrectly interpreting an ambiguous contractual provision); Computer Task Grp., Inc. v. Palm Beach Cty., 782 So. 2d 942, 943 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“Under federal authority, which would apply to the contract in this case, the test for whether an arbitrator exceeds his authority is whether the arbitrator had the power, based on the parties’ submissions or the arbitratio…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989)
- City OF W. Palm Beach v. Palm Beach Cnty. Police Benevolent Ass'n, 387 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Applewhite v. Sheen Fin. Res., Inc., 608 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Cassedy v. Merrill Lynch, 751 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Marks v. State, 423 So. 2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- James v. State, 751 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Cochran v. Broward Cnty. Police Benevolent Ass'n, Inc., 693 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- World Invest Corp. & Henry Tegler, Jr. v. Breen, 684 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)