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

• A construction company, Journeyman Construction, LP, and a hotel owner, Premier Hospitality II, entered into a contract to build a Hampton Inn & Suites in Las Cruces, New Mexico, which included an arbitration clause for dispute resolution. Disputes arose, leading to arbitration where both parties were awarded attorney fees as part of their net recoveries. Premier paid the full award, but later, when the court initiated a status check, Premier contested the award of attorney fees, claiming they were outside the arbitrator's authority. The court confirmed the award except for the attorney fees and remanded for review. Journeyman appealed the remand order (paras 1, 3-5).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Journeyman Construction, LP): Argued that the district court's order to remand for review of attorney fees was appealable and that Premier's challenge to the arbitration award, specifically the attorney fees, was untimely (paras 6, 8-13).
• Appellee (Premier Hospitality II): Contended that the remand order was not a final order and thus not appealable. Premier also argued that its challenge to the attorney fees was not untimely because Journeyman never withdrew its motion to the arbitrator regarding the mechanic's lien, and no modified award was issued (paras 6, 12).

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court's order to remand for review of attorney fees is appealable (para 6).
• Whether Premier's challenge to the arbitration award, specifically regarding attorney fees, was timely (paras 8-13).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's decision and remanded for entry of an order confirming the arbitration award, including attorney fees, and for such other proceedings as necessary to conclude the action (para 14).

Reasons

• RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge (with CELIA FOY CASTILLO, Chief Judge, and MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge concurring): The court held that the order of remand was appealable as it effectively denied confirmation of part of the arbitration award. It further held that Premier's challenge to the award was untimely as it was made nearly a year after the award was paid and beyond the statutory deadlines for contesting an arbitration award. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory deadlines to ensure the finality of arbitration awards and to conserve the time and resources of the courts and parties. Premier's acceptance of the benefits of the award (payment and lien release) further barred its right to challenge the award. The court concluded that Premier forfeited any right to contest the award by failing to timely avail itself of statutory remedies (paras 6-13).