Skip to main content

Is it true that in appeal to superior court, to prevail the defendant must win an award that is 23% less than the arbitrator's

Phoenix, AZ |

award to the plaintiff? Then once that award in appeal is determined, then the attorney's fees that the arbitrator granted to the plaintiff, now are not the responsibility for the defendant to pay? In other words, in appeal a "win" for the defendant means the appeals judge allows an award that is 23 % less than the arbitrator's Award, and then the defendant does not have to pay the plaintiff's attorney's fees and other court costs, that the arbitrator originally assigned to the defendant, correct? I hope this is clear! Thank you!

+ Read More

Attorney answers 3

Posted

The post is confused and far from clear. Try again and good luck.

Asker

Posted

I was told that to prevail in Superior Court and not have to pay the other side's attorney's fees, court costs, etc., then the winning party must have a 23% more favorable principle award from the Superior Court judge than the previous arbitrator's principle award. I hope this is clearer now; and can you tell me if that is true, Alan? Thank you! Best wishes!

Posted

Wrong. There is no rule about how much the appeal must change the award. Generally, in contract if the plaintiff wins anything, the plaintiff gets attorney's fees.

All information on this website is not, and is not intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation, as each case is different and contains different facts. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and e-mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until you establish an attorney-client relationship with us.

Asker

Posted

I think you are misunderstanding what I've written, Thomas, or I am misunderstanding you. I was told that to prevail in Superior Court and not have to pay the other side's attorney's fees, then the winning party must have a 23% more favorable principle award from the Superior Court judge than the arbitrator's principle award. I hope this is clearer now; and can you tell me if that is true?

Posted

Your reference to the 23% most likely refers to sanctions for an appeal from a compulsory arbitration award. In general, the Superior Court will do an 'apples to apples' comparison of the arbitration award to the superior court result. If the appealing party does not improve the result by at least 23%, the Superior Court can award the prevailing party their court costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness fees. There are other rules and statutes governing court costs, attorney's fee and expert witness fees that might also apply, depending upon the specific facts of the case.

This answer is for general education purposes only. It does not create an attorney-client relationship nor is it intended to provide legal advice. The answer is based on the limited information provided and the answer might be different had additional information been provided. You should consult an attorney.

Asker

Posted

Hi Bruec! Did you mean, If the appealing party does improve the result by at least 23%, the Superior Court can award the prevailing party their court costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness fees. I was told the court must improve the result by at least 23? and then the court can award the prevailing part their their costs, attorney's fees and expert witness fees. Please confirm?! Thank you, Bruce! Best wishes!