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

• Doña Ana County challenged the confirmation of an arbitration award in favor of The Communication Workers of America, Local 7911. The dispute involved the arbitrator's decision, which the County argued was unsupported, contrary to law, and/or in excess of the arbitrator's powers.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Doña Ana County, Manuel L. Arrieta, District Judge, August 8, 2017.

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellant (County): Argued that the arbitrator's decision was unsupported, contrary to law, and exceeded the arbitrator's powers. Contended that the district court misapplied the standard of review by treating the parties as bound by the arbitrator's findings and relying on inappropriate authorities. Also argued that the arbitration award required re-appropriation of funds, which was contrary to law, and challenged the inclusion of permissive and allegedly illegal subjects in the Union's last best offer.
• Respondent-Appellee (Union): Supported the confirmation of the arbitration award, arguing that the arbitrator's decision was well-founded and that the district court correctly applied the law in confirming the award.

Legal Issues

• Whether the arbitrator's decision was unsupported by substantial evidence.
• Whether the arbitration award was contrary to law due to requiring re-appropriation of funds.
• Whether the inclusion of permissive subjects of bargaining and allegedly illegal subjects in the Union's last best offer rendered the award contrary to law.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the confirmation of the arbitration award.

Reasons

• The Court, per Judge Timothy L. Garcia with Judges J. Miles Hanisee and Stephen G. French concurring, held that:
  The district court applied the correct standard of review, specifically a heightened standard as set forth in Board of Education of Carlsbad Municipal Schools v. Harrell, and did not misapprehend the parties' binding by the arbitrator's findings (paras 4-5).
  The arbitrator's decision was supported by substantial evidence, and the County's contention that some evidence was ignored was unfounded. The arbitrator deemed the conflicting evidence less compelling, which is within their discretion (para 6).
  The arbitration award was not contrary to law for requiring re-appropriation of funds. The evidence on this point was conflicting, and the Court deferred to the arbitrator's resolution of this conflict. Additionally, the award's consideration of funding associated with a gross receipts tax resolution, which explicitly earmarked a portion for "salaries and equipment," was found to be lawful (paras 7-8).
  The inclusion of permissive subjects of bargaining and allegedly illegal subjects in the Union's last best offer did not render the award contrary to law. The Court found the savings clause adequate to rectify any alleged illegalities (para 9).
  The Court deemed it unnecessary to address the County's third issue, advanced pursuant to an alternative standard of review, as the primary issues were resolved in favor of affirming the arbitration award (para 10).