The Miscalculation Was Not Evident From The Face Of The Prior Award.
Crooymans v. Givner, Case No. B305916 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 7, 2021) (unpublished) demonstrates how narrow the power of an arbitrator is to correct an arbitration award under CCP § 1286.6(a). There, children, the executors/trustees of their late father’s estate/trust, filed an arbitration claim against father’s tax planning attorneys. The attorneys were found liable to the tune of $654,800. Children then asked for prevailing party attorney’s fees and costs of about $3.2 million, with the arbitrator filing an original final fees/costs award of around $1.738 million. However, upon a request by children to correct a miscalculation under section 1286.6(a), the arbitrator indicated he failed to factor in a supplemental fee declaration and upped the fees/costs award to about $2.025 million. However, a superior court judge vacated the correction after finding that there was no miscalculation evident from the face of the final award.
The 2/3 DCA affirmed the undoing of the arbitrator’s correction. At the outset, it found that the requirement of a “reasoned award” in an arbitration contract or ADR neutral rules likely does not apply to a fees/costs award, but just to a merit adjudication of claims. Then, it sustained the lower court’s conclusion because there was no evident miscalculation under case law construing section 1286.6(a). (Severtson v. Williams Construction Co., 173 Cal.App.3d 86, 95 (1985).)