WPC uEӭ؋{@C ="y44_;kRBA*s~p]yP^c|<ν2O*R2to^SE2?DL u ӓecai@(e +Fm3) F6ꅌnųj)mDflƺ"aAk T[4RspDt^{MS'MhfƟZNltdr|v/&1eq;>p0-$\YgjpDmhB{v(j\+4&2ZC8$c?89Bc̢TB9 q"qQqǢT{H-c6TT&w8?;sR>6Am?^3+sH@y~Z6zSb+m $>jя-)# >UNI % 0U<Pw@4U<+3 0 AQ  [ d   0DU:9U:?y? B 0Dt 0D 0D D/@@ Bo D3HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6HPBXLB0nLh(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(7$  7XXdXXd7  Xd|XXX-Bu Z$Arrus BT Roman 0Ӏ1U2Ӏ3Ӏ4Ӏ>ӀHIJDKn~<$,3|xK)L  Z $Arrus BT Roman  X#$  X44XXX `   1    ݀Atranscriptofthearbitrationhearingisnotintherecordinthiscase.((3X#$ 7!  7XXdd7  XTqXXX   `   0   !"%C<< C   $ XdoXXX   `   2    Ӏ 295312 . Confirmationofaward .Uponapplicationofaparty,thecourt  shallconfirmanaward,unless,withinthetimelimitshereinafterimposed,groundsareurgedforvacatingormodifyingorcorrectingtheaward,inwhichcasethecourtshallproceedasprovidedin295313and295314.   $ XdoXXX   `   3    Ӏ 295313.Vacationofaward. (a)Uponapplicationofaparty,thecourt  shallvacateanawardwhere: ` (1)Theawardwasprocuredbycorruption,fraudorotherunduemeans; ` (2)Therewasevidentpartialitybyanarbitratorappointedasaneutralorcorruptioninanyofthearbitratorsormisconductprejudicingtherightsofanyparty; ` (3)Thearbitratorsexceededtheirpowers; ` (4)Thearbitratorsrefusedtopostponethehearinguponsufficientcausebeingshowntherefororrefusedtohearevidencematerialtothecontroversyorotherwisesoconductedthehearing,contrarytotheprovisionsof295306,astoprejudicesubstantiallytherightsofaparty;or.... `    $ XdoXXX   `   4    Ӏ 295314.Groundsandprocedureformodificationofaward. (a)Upon  applicationmadewithinninety(90)daysafterdeliveryofacopyoftheawardtotheapplicant,thecourtshallmodifyorcorrecttheawardwhere: ` (1)Therewasanevidentmiscalculationoffiguresoranevidentmistakeinthedescriptionofanyperson,thingorpropertyreferredtointheaward; ` (2)Thearbitratorshaveawardeduponamatternotsubmittedtothemandtheawardmaybecorrectedwithoutaffectingthemeritsofthedecisionupontheissuessubmitted;or   g  ` (3)Theawardisimperfectinanymatterofform,notaffectingthemeritsofthecontroversy.($$   1   !"  XtXXXOXXt   Ad FILEDXtXO  September3,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh ,yAZ"Arial Regular !"  XtXXXOXXt   Ad FILEDXtXO  September3,1999CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerkdAh ,yAZ"Arial RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 dLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  (#$  0  ''' dxdP Pd'dxd 7!  7XXdd7  X44XXX  TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7XXdXXd7K4r (<,(j 8` `@E` ttx0, r4KKKH>r (<,(j 8` `@E` ttx0, r>HIHt (>.*jx` `@E` ttx0 tHIJ@ JKt (>.*jx` `@E` ttx0 tKINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@!WESTERNSECTIONATJACKSON `  ______________________________________________ D&ECONSTRUCTIONCOMPANY,  INC.,     ` PlaintiffAppellant, `     h      p ShelbyChanceryNo.980313I `     h      p andNo.980322IVs. `     h      p C.A.No.02A019812CH00358    ROBERTJ.DENLEY,CO.,INC.,     ` DefendnatAppellee.____________________________________________________________________________@s s FROMTHESHELBYCOUNTYSHELBYCOURT@  THEHONORABLEWALTERL.EVANS,CHANCELLOR@mmJulieC.BartholomewofSomerville@rr(ForAppellee@ TedM.Hayden;Less,Getz&LipmanofMemphis@>>(ForAppellant@$ REVERSEDANDREMANDED ($$ @33' Opinionfiled: *&&  `     h      p   W.FRANKCRAWFORD, 2..  `     h      p   PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S.CONCUR:ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGEDAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE  ;77' ӛ ` Thisisanactiontoenforceanarbitrationaward.Plaintiff/appellant,D&EConstructionCompany(D&E),appealstheorderoftheChanceryCourtvacatinganarbitrationawardrenderedagainstdefendant/appellee,RobertJ.DenleyCompany(Denley). ` In1995,D&EandDenleyenteredintoacontractwherebyD&Ewastoprovideallneededmaterials,labor,andservicestodeveloptheCottonwoodEstatesSubdivisioninCollierville,Tennessee.Theconstructionagreementincludedanarbitrationclausestating:,..,8 ` 8 ` !` ! 10.8 AllclaimsordisputesbetweentheContractorand  theOwnerarisingoutorrelatingtotheContract,orthebreachthereof,shallbedecidedbyarbitrationinaccordancewiththeConstructionIndustryArbitrationRulesoftheAmericanArbitrationAssociationcurrentlyineffectunlessthepartiesmutuallyagreeotherwiseandsubjecttoaninitialpresentationoftheclaimordisputetotheArchitectasrequiredunderParagraph10.5.NoticeofthedemandforarbitrationshallbefiledinwritingwiththeotherpartytothisAgreementandwiththeAmericanArbitrationAssociationandshallbemadewithinareasonabletimeafterthedisputehasarisen.Theawardrenderedbythearbitratororarbitratorsshallbefinal,andjudgmentmaybeentereduponitinaccordancewithapplicablelawinanycourthavingjurisdictionthereof....TheagreementhereinamongthepartiestotheAgreementandanyotherwrittenagreementtoarbitratereferredtohereinshallbespecificallyenforceableunderapplicablelawinanycourthavingjurisdictionthereof.    ̜,-,,-,XXXX44ԛ,//, ` #X44XXXИ#,-, XdoXXXdo#XdoXX Xdo;#,-,Followinganallegedbreachoftheconstructioncontract,D&Esubmitteda )%% claimforarbitrationrequesting$69,760.69indamages,whichdidnotoriginallyincludeaclaimforattorneysfees.Denleyfiledaresponseandacounterclaimintheamountof$250,000.00.InDecember1997,athreepersonarbitrationpanelheardargumentsonD&EsclaimandDenleyscounterclaim.  ##  1      ׀Thearbitrationpanelissued 1-- awrittenAwardoftheArbitratorswhichfoundinfavorofD&Eandstatedinpertinentpart:̜,.,,.,,00,8 ` 8 ` !` !WE,THEUNDERSIGNEDARBITRATORS... 733 AWARDasfollows:    8 ` 8 ` !` !Ontheclaimforretainage,RobertJ.DenleyCompany,Inc.shallpaytoD&EConstruction,Inc.thesumofSixtyFourThousandSevenHundredFiftySixDollarsandNineCents($64,756.09)onorbeforeFebruary10,1998,pertheattachedfinancialbreakdown.    8 ` 8 ` !` !Ontheclaimforinterest,RobertJ.DenleyCompany,Inc.shallpaytoD&EConstruction,Inc.thesumofSevenThousandFiveHundredSeventySixDollarsandFortySixCents($7,576.46)onorbeforeFebruary10,1998.    8 ` 8 ` !` !Ontheclaimforattorneysfees,RobertJ.DenleyCompany,Inc.shallpaytoD&EConstruction,Inc.thesumofThirteenThousandDollarsandNoCents($13,000.00)onorbeforeFebruary10,1998.    8 ` 8 ` !` !Thecounterclaimisherebydeniedinitsentirety....,/,,/,,1    1,̜,22, ` D&Efiledapetition,/, XdoXXXdo#XdoXX Xdo#,/-,XXXX,-,toconfirmthearbitrationawardpursuanttoT.C.A.295312(Supp.1998). ##  2      ׀Denleyfiledapetitiontovacatethearbitrationaward  pursuanttoT.C.A.295313(Supp.1998) ##  3      ׀ortomodifyorcorrecttheaward  pursuanttoT.C.A.295314(Supp.1998).\ ##  4      ׀Denleyspetitionstatesinpertinent  part:,0,,0,,33,8 ` 8 ` !` !3.MovantaversthattheawardshouldbevacatedbythisCourtonthefollowinggrounds:    8 ` 8 ` !` !(a)Theawardwasprocuredbyunduemeans.    8 ` 8 ` !` !(b)Therewasevidentpartialitybyoneormorearbitratorsand/ormisconductprejudicingtherightsofMovant.    8 ` 8 ` !` !(c)Thearbitratorsexceededtheirpowers.    8 ` 8 ` !` !(d)ThearbitratorsrefusedtohearevidencematerialtothecontroversyorotherwiseconductedthehearingcontrarytotheprovisionsofT.C.A.295606,soastoprejudicesubstantiallytherightsofMovant.    8 ` 8 ` !` !4.Inthealternative,MovantaversthatthearbitrationawardshouldbemodifiedbythisCourt,onthefollowinggrounds:    8 ` 8 ` !` !(a)Therewasanevidentmiscalculationoffigures.    8 ` 8 ` !` !(b)Thearbitratorshaveawardeduponmattersnotproperlysubmittedtothemandtheawardmaybecorrectedwithoutaffectingthemeritsofthedecisionupontheissuessubmitted.    8 ` 8 ` !` !(c)Theawardisimperfectinamatterofform,notaffectingthemeritsofthecontroversy.     ` Thecaseswereconsolidated,andD&Essubsequentmotionforsummaryjudgmentwasdenied.AnevidentiaryhearingwasheldonNovember23,1998.Thehearingconsistedoftheargumentofcounselandthreeexhibitsadmittedbystipulation,whichwerethepartiescontract,thedemandforarbitrationfiledbyD&E,andtheawardofthearbitrators. ` OnDecember3,1998,thechancellorenteredanordervacatingtheentirearbitrationawardpursuanttoT.C.A.295313(a)(3)onthebasisthatthearbitratorshadexceededtheirpowersinawardingD&Eattorneysfees.Thechancellorsorderstatesinpertinentpart: 400 8 ` 8 ` !` !  THISCAUSEcameontobeheardonNovember23,1998,bytheHonorableWalterL.Evans,ChancellorofPartIoftheChanceryCourtofShelbyCounty,Tennessee,uponthepetitionofD&EConstructionCompany,Inc.forenforcementofanarbitrationawardandthepetitionofRobertJ.DenleyCo.,Inc.tovacateormodifythearbitrationawardandtheanswersthereto,filedintheaboveconsolidatedcauses;upontheexhibitsreceivedinthecause;uponstatementsofcounselfortheparties;andupontheentirerecordherein.    8 ` 8 ` !` !  FromallofwhichitappearstotheCourtthatthearbitratorsawardofattorneysfeesexceededtheirpowers,thattheattorneysfeeswereintegraltotheaward,andthatthearbitrationshould,therefore,bevacated. XdoXXXdo    ` D&Ehasappealedandpresentsthefollowingissuesforreviewasstatedinitsbrief:8 ` 8 ` !` !I.WhethertheChancellorbelowerredinvacatingtheawardofthearbitrationpanelonthebasisthatithadexceededitsauthoritybyawardingD&EConstructionattorneysfees?    8 ` 8 ` !` !II.WhethertheChancellorbelowerredinvacatingtheentireawardofthearbitrationpanel,ratherthanmerelytheawardofattorneysfees,onthebasisthatthepanelhadexceededitsauthoritybyawardingD&EConstructionattorneysfees?    8 ` 8 ` !` !III.WhetherD&EConstructionisentitledtoconfirmationoftheawardofthearbitrationpanel,alongwithanawardofinterestandattorneysfees?    DenleypresentstheadditionalissuethatifthisCourtfindsthetrialcourtsordervacatingtheawardtobeerror,whetherthecaseshouldberemandedforthetrialcourttoconsiderDenleysotherchallengestotheawardwhichwerenotconsideredbythecourt. ` Trialcourtsplayalimitedroleinreviewingthedecisionofanarbitrator. Arnoldv.MorganKeegan&Co.,Inc. ,914S.W.2d445,448(Tenn.1996).The 2..  Arnold courtstated: 400 Л8 ` 8 ` !` ! [W]herethepartyhasagreedtoarbitrate,heorshe,ineffecthasrelinquishedmuchof[therighttoacourt'sdecisiononthemerits].Thepartystillcanaskacourttoreviewthearbitrator'sdecision, butthecourtwillsetthat 955 decisionasideonlyinveryunusualcircumstances .6 22   ̜ Id. 󛀜(quoting UnitedPaperworksInt'lUnion,AFL-CIOv.Misco,Inc. ,484U.S.29, 9 55 36(1987)(emphasisinoriginal)). ` Under Arnold ,thisCourtisrequiredtoutilizea"deferential"standardof  review.Wearenot"permittedtoconsiderthemeritsofanarbitrationawardevenifthepartiesallegethattheawardrestsonerrorsoffactormisrepresentationofthecontract." Arnold ,914S.W.2dat450.Furthermore,wearerequiredtoacceptthe   factspresentedunlesswefindthatthosefactsareclearlyerroneous,andshouldreviewlegalmatters"inamannerdesignedtominimizeinterferencewithanefficientandeconomicalsystemofalternativedisputeresolution." Id.    ` UndertheUniformArbitrationAct,anarbitrator'sawardmaybevacatedifthearbitratorexceedshisorherauthorityandanapplicationtovacateismadewithinninetydaysafterdeliveryofacopyoftheawardtotheapplicant.T.C.A.29-5-313(Supp.1998).Thescopeofanarbitrator'sauthority"isdeterminedbythetermsoftheagreementbetweenthepartieswhichincludestheagreementofthepartiestoarbitratethedispute." InternationalTalentGroup,Inc.v.Copyright   Mgmt.Co. ,769S.W.2d217,218(Tenn.App.1988).Thefactthattherelief   grantedbythearbitratormaynothavebeengrantedbyacourtisnotagroundforvacatingorrefusingtoconfirmanaward.T.C.A.29-5-313(a)(5)(Supp.1998).Significantly,under Arnold ,an"arbitrationawardisnotsubjecttovacationfora &"" meremistakeoffactorlaw." Id. ;914S.W.2dat451(citing McLeroyv.Waller ,731 ($$ S.W.2d789,791(Ark.Ct.App.1987)); Seither&CherryCo.v.IllinoisBankBldg. *&& Corp. ,419N.E.2d940,945(Ill.App.Ct.1981); WesternWaterproofingCo.v. , (( LindenwoodColleges ,662S.W.2d288,291(Mo.Ct.App.1983); Turnerv. .$** NicholsonProperties,Inc. ,341S.E.2d42,45(N.C.Ct.App.1986)). 0(,,  ` The Arnold courtalsostressedtheneedforfinalityinarbitrationproceedings, 2,.. despitetheharshresultsthatmayattimesfollow:8 ` 8 ` !` ! Ifanarbitratormakesamistake,eitherastolaworfact,itisamisfortuneoftheparty,andthereisnohelpforit.ThereisnorightofappealandtheCourthasnopowertorevisethedecisionsofjudgeswhoareoftheparties'own 9055 Мchoosing.𛀀An[arbitration]awardisintendedtosettlethematterincontroversy,andthussavetheexpenseoflitigation.Ifamistakebeasufficientgroundforsettingasideanaward,itopensadoorforcomingintocourtinalmosteverycase;forinninecasesoutoftensomemistakeeitheroflaworfact,maybesuggestedbythedissatisfiedparty.Thus...arbitration,insteadofendingwouldtendtoincreaselitigation.    М Id. 󛀜(quoting CarolinaVirginiaFashionExhibitors,Inc.v.Gunther ,255S.E.2d414,   420(N.C.Ct.App.1979)). ` D&Efirstcontendsthatthetrialcourterredinvacatingthearbitrationawardonthebasisthatithadexceededitsauthoritybyawardingattorneysfees.D&Earguesthatthe AmericanRulerequiringeachlitiganttopayitsownattorneysfeesabsentastatutoryorcontractualobligationdoesnotnecessarilyapplytoarbitrationpanels.Wemustdisagree.Itiswellsettledinthisjurisdictionthatattorneyfeescannotbeawardedincontractdisputesunlessthecontractorapplicablestatutoryordecisionallawsoprovides. Guessv.Maury, 726S.W.2d906(Tenn.App.1986).   ` Thequestionthenbecomeswhetherthepanelsawardofattorneyfeesexceedstheirpowerrequiringvacationoftheaward.OurSupremeCourthasansweredthisquestionin Arnold. TheCourtsaid: # 8 ` 8 ` !` !  Arbitrators exceedtheirpowerswhentheygobeyondthescopeofauthoritygrantedbythearbitrationagreement. InternationalTalentGroup ,769S.W.2dat ' ## 218.Arnoldassertsthatthepanelexceededitspowersbecause thearbitrationagreementrequiresthearbitratorstoapplythelawoftheStateofTennessee,andthearbitrationdecisioniscompletelyirrationalandtotallycontrarytotheundisputedandagreedevidenceandthelawacknowledgedtobeapplicable.    8 ` 8 ` !` !  ThetrialcourtconcludedthatArnoldspositionwassimplythatthepanelhadmadeamistakeoflaworfactwhenitfoundthattherewasnorelianceonamaterialmisrepresentation.Wecannotsaythisconclusionwaserroneous.Sincethetrialcourtisnotempoweredtoretrytheissuesbeforethearbitrator,itwasproperforthecourttoacceptthepanelsfindingsunlessclearlyerroneous.NothingabouttheawardsuggeststhatthepanelfailedtoapplyTennesseelaw,asrequiredbytheagreement.Thus,thepaneldidnotgooutsidethearbitrationagreement;hence,itdidnotexceeditspowers.955   Ї8 ` 8 ` !` !  WefurthernotethatTenn.CodeAnn.295313(a)specificallyprovidesthat [t]hefactthatthereliefwassuchthatitcouldnotorwouldnotbegrantedbyacourtoflaworequityisnotgroundforvacatingorrefusingtoconfirmtheaward.Tenn.CodeAnn.295313(a)(5).Thusanarbitrationawardisnotsubjecttovacationforameremistakeoffactorlaw. SeeMcLeroy   v.Waller ,731S.W.2d789,791(Ark.Ct.App.1987);    Seither&CherryCo.v.IllinoisBankBldg.Corp. ,95Ill.   App.3d191,50Ill.Dec.672,677,419N.E.2d940,945(1981); WesternWaterproffingCo.v.Lindenwood   Colleges ,662S.W.2d288,291(Mo.Ct.App.1983);    Turnerv.NicholsonProperties,Inc. ,80N.C.App.208,   341S.E.2d42,45(1986). Turner isparticularly   instructivehere:    8 ` 8 ` !` !8  Inessencerespondentarguesthatanarbitratorwhoerrsasamatteroflawexceedshispowersandasaresulttheawardcanbevacated.Allowingsuchreliefisinconsistentwiththegeneralrulethat errorsoflaworfact,oranerroneousdecisionofmatterssubmittedto[arbitration],areinsufficienttoinvalidateanawardfairlyandhonestlymade. LL  `  341S.E.2dat45(citationomitted).8 ` 8 ` !` !  Arnoldurgesustofindthatthepaneldidnotmakea meremistakeoffactorlaw,butmadeadecisionsofaroutsideofthelawthatitshouldbeconsideredirrationaland,hence,subjecttovacation.Wedeclinetodoso.     Id. at45051. %!!  ` Atrialcourtunderthisfactualscenariocouldbeheldinerrorforawardingattorneysfees.Bythesametoken,thearbigtrationpanelcnaanbefoundtohavemadeanerroroflaw,butwedeemthis insufficienttoinvalidateanawardfairlyandhonestlymade. Arnold ,at451. Thisbringsustotheappelleesissueofwhetherthe -)) caseshouldberemandedforahearingontheadditionalgroundsassertedinthetrialcourtforvacationoftheaward. ` Therecordreflectsthatthepartiesbystipulationenteredthethreeexhibitspreviouslyreferredto.Therewasnoevidencepresentedbyeitherpartyotherthantheexhibits.TherecordalsoreflectsthatDenleyscounselincolloquywiththecourtindicatedthatevidentiaryproofwouldbeforthcomingonthepartofDenley.The 955 Courtonlyconsideredtheissueconcerningtheawardofattorneyfees.AlthoughDenleyscounseldidnotattempttoputonanyevidenceandapparentlywasnotprecludedbythecourtfromdoingso,itdoesappearthatthehearingbeforethecourtwasconfinedtotheissueoftheawardofattorneyfeesandnottheotherissuesraisedbyDenleyspetitiontovacatetheaward.Itappearsthatthetrialcourtsrulingfromthebenchindicatedtocounselthatthehearingwasended.Infairness,Denleyshouldhaveitsdayincourt. ` Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisreversed,andthecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforfurtherproceedingstoconsidertheotherissuesraisedbyDenleyspetitiontovacatetheaward.Costsoftheappealareassessedonehalftotheappellantandonehalftotheappellee. ` Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisreversed,andthecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforsuchfurtherproceedingsasmaybenecessary.Costsoftheappealareassessedonehalftotheappellantandonehalftotheappellee.XXXX `     h      p _________________________________   `     h      p W.FRANKCRAWFORD,   `     h      p PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S. # XXX XvL#   CONCUR:    XXXX____________________________________ #  ALANE.HIGHERS,JUDGE # XXX XtN# $  XXXX____________________________________ &""  DAVIDR.FARMER,JUDGE # XXX XO#Ԝ    ,