In a recent decision, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court ruled that an arbitrator, having first mediated a dispute, could not subsequently resume the role of arbitrator.
Assuming such a dual role would require the written consent of all parties involved.
The Facts of the Case
The case, Minkowitz v. Israeli, involved the arbitration of financial and child custody issues as part of a New Jersey couple’s divorce proceedings. Barbara Minkowitz and Ron Israeli agreed to forgo judicial determination of all financial issues in favor of binding arbitration and agreed all custody and parenting time issues would be reviewed in non-binding arbitration. However, prior to the commencement of arbitration proceedings, the parties decided to engage in settlement discussions and mediation to narrow the issues for final determination. The parties ultimately executed four settlement agreements on a range of issues, including alimony, tax issues, and child support.
After a majority of the issues were resolved, Minkowitz retained new counsel who sought the release of the forensic accountant’s reports, which served as the basis for many of the agreements. When the accountant refused, Minkowitz moved for the release of the documents before the arbitrator. The Family Part judge denied the motions and ultimately confirmed the “arbitration awards” as final judgments. Among several arguments raised in appeal, Minkowitz maintained that the arbitrator’s orders must be set aside because the arbitrator exceeded his powers.
The Court’s Decision
The Appellate Division ultimately concluded that the settlement agreements were valid. However, all decisions entered by the arbitrator after he served as a mediator were not enforceable. As explained by the panel:
Mediation, although a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution, differs from binding arbitration…We conclude the differences in the roles of these two types of dispute resolution professionals necessitate that a mediator, who may become privy to party confidence in guiding disputants to a mediated resolution, cannot thereafter retain the appearance of a neutral fact finder necessary to conduct a binding arbitration proceeding. Consequently, absent the parties’ agreement, an arbitrator appointed under the [Uniform Arbitration Act] may not assume the role of mediator and, thereafter, resume the role of arbitrator.
The court also highlighted that once litigants elect to resolve their dispute through binding arbitration, they are locked into their decision. “If binding arbitration is selected as the forum for resolution disputes, a litigant cannot jump back and forth between the court and the arbitral forum. By its very nature, arbitration does not permit such a hybrid system….”
As this case highlights, the decision to engage in arbitration or mediation should not be taken lightly. The parties must fully understand how their decision may impact their legal rights and remedies going forward.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Arbitrator Can't Wear Two Hats Says NJ Courts
Author: Joel N. Kreizman
In a recent decision, the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court ruled that an arbitrator, having first mediated a dispute, could not subsequently resume the role of arbitrator.
Assuming such a dual role would require the written consent of all parties involved.
The Facts of the Case
The case, Minkowitz v. Israeli, involved the arbitration of financial and child custody issues as part of a New Jersey couple’s divorce proceedings. Barbara Minkowitz and Ron Israeli agreed to forgo judicial determination of all financial issues in favor of binding arbitration and agreed all custody and parenting time issues would be reviewed in non-binding arbitration. However, prior to the commencement of arbitration proceedings, the parties decided to engage in settlement discussions and mediation to narrow the issues for final determination. The parties ultimately executed four settlement agreements on a range of issues, including alimony, tax issues, and child support.
After a majority of the issues were resolved, Minkowitz retained new counsel who sought the release of the forensic accountant’s reports, which served as the basis for many of the agreements. When the accountant refused, Minkowitz moved for the release of the documents before the arbitrator. The Family Part judge denied the motions and ultimately confirmed the “arbitration awards” as final judgments. Among several arguments raised in appeal, Minkowitz maintained that the arbitrator’s orders must be set aside because the arbitrator exceeded his powers.
The Court’s Decision
The Appellate Division ultimately concluded that the settlement agreements were valid. However, all decisions entered by the arbitrator after he served as a mediator were not enforceable. As explained by the panel:
Mediation, although a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution, differs from binding arbitration…We conclude the differences in the roles of these two types of dispute resolution professionals necessitate that a mediator, who may become privy to party confidence in guiding disputants to a mediated resolution, cannot thereafter retain the appearance of a neutral fact finder necessary to conduct a binding arbitration proceeding. Consequently, absent the parties’ agreement, an arbitrator appointed under the [Uniform Arbitration Act] may not assume the role of mediator and, thereafter, resume the role of arbitrator.
The court also highlighted that once litigants elect to resolve their dispute through binding arbitration, they are locked into their decision. “If binding arbitration is selected as the forum for resolution disputes, a litigant cannot jump back and forth between the court and the arbitral forum. By its very nature, arbitration does not permit such a hybrid system….”
As this case highlights, the decision to engage in arbitration or mediation should not be taken lightly. The parties must fully understand how their decision may impact their legal rights and remedies going forward.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
