Tips on Arbitration Advocacy, Part IV (Conclusion)
A quick way to lose credibility with the arbitrator is being too argumentative or trying to disparage opposing counsel or witnesses.
June 01, 2017 at 10:28 AM
17 minute read
As the parties realize that the arbitrators will use a relaxed standard for the admission of evidence, they will often, before the hearing, exchange hundreds of potential exhibits and usually not object to the other party's designations. During the course of the hearing often only a small percentage of the documents are used by the attorneys in their presentations or during witness testimony. This can leave the arbitrator with the dilemma of what to do with these other orphan documents. These documents can lengthen the time and expense of the arbitrator's review of the record and might cause confusion or suggest issues not even raised by the parties. Many arbitrators will not review or analyze them without guidance from the attorneys. I usually, at the end of the hearing and before final briefing has commenced, request of the attorneys if they intend to rely on any of the documents not referred to in briefs or during the hearing, to identify them and explain why and how I should consider them. This prevents parties from complaining that the opposition “surprised them” by arguing a document in post-hearing briefing that was never used before, even though designated, and requesting further briefing or a reopening of the hearing. If the arbitrator does not insist, you should, at the close of evidence, agree with your opponent or inquire with the panel as to the parameters of the record, including written documents, prehearing depositions, expert materials and any demonstrative aids that might have been used.
Demeanor
A quick way to lose credibility with the arbitrator is being too argumentative or trying to disparage opposing counsel or witnesses. Do not take shots at the witnesses or opposing counsel. The arbitrator can determine the witness's credibility from your questions, the evidence and the conduct of the witness without snide remarks. Do not interrupt opposing counsel. You will get your turn. If you have a point to make, make it succinctly to the arbitrator without engaging in overt hostility. While these proceedings are less formal than a court trial, arbitrators try to ensure that appropriate decorum is followed.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllU.S. Solicitor General Acknowledges 'Real Shift in Supreme Court Practice'
$1.2 Million Settlement: Trantolo & Trantolo Drives Deal for Motorcyclist
2 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250