AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• In 2011, Stephen and Barbro Kirschenbaum hired L.D. Miller Construction Company for construction work on their property in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Disputes arose regarding the quality and payment for the work, leading to an Arbitration Agreement between the parties, designating Roger Lengyel as the arbitrator under the American Arbitration Association (AAA) rules. Subsequent disagreements about the arbitration process and the arbitrator's neutrality led to legal proceedings to clarify and enforce the arbitration agreement (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• District Court, November 2013: Ordered vacating default judgment against the Kirschenbaums and compelled arbitration under the AAA with Lengyel as the designated arbitrator (para 6).
• District Court, June 4, 2014: Concluded that the arbitration should be subject to all AAA rules, including those regarding the disqualification of an arbitrator, thus allowing AAA to disqualify Lengyel if warranted (para 10).
• District Court, November 2014: Denied the Kirschenbaums' motion for reconsideration of the June 4 order (para 12).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee (Miller): Argued that the arbitration agreement incorporated all AAA rules, which should include the ability to disqualify an arbitrator for cause, such as non-neutrality (paras 7, 9).
• Defendants-Appellants (Kirschenbaums): Contended that the arbitration agreement intended for Lengyel to serve as a non-neutral arbitrator, not subject to AAA Rule 20, and that the district court's order compelling arbitration under AAA did not allow for his disqualification (paras 8, 11).

Legal Issues

• Whether an arbitrator designated by the parties can be disqualified by the AAA for cause if the parties did not explicitly agree in writing that the arbitrator shall function as a non-neutral arbitrator (para 1).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision that the AAA has the authority to disqualify the designated arbitrator, Lengyel, if the AAA determines that such disqualification is warranted under its rules and procedures (para 28).

Reasons

• Per M. Monica Zamora, J., concurred by Jonathan B. Sutin, J., and Linda M. Vanzi, J.: The court found that the arbitration agreement's language intended for the arbitration to be conducted under all applicable AAA rules, which include provisions for disqualifying an arbitrator. The designation of Lengyel as the arbitrator did not explicitly state he would serve as a non-neutral arbitrator, and without such explicit written agreement, the AAA rules regarding neutrality and disqualification apply. The court also distinguished this case from Rivera, noting that the availability of AAA and its rules for replacing a designated arbitrator in certain circumstances does not violate the parties' agreement to arbitrate under AAA. The court concluded that the district court did not act unreasonably, arbitrarily, or fancifully in denying the Kirschenbaums' motion for reconsideration, thus affirming the decision to allow AAA to disqualify Lengyel if warranted (paras 13-27).