Photo: Shutterstock

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has upheld an arbitration award in favor of homeowners who sued Toll Brothers for defective construction.

A three-judge panel consisting of Judges John Bender, Anne Lazarus and Eugene Strassburger affirmed the $56,518 award, which includes attorney fees, in favor of plaintiffs Michael and Michelle D'Amelia.

Toll Brothers appealed the award, arguing that the arbitrator refused to hear argument that opposing counsel overbilled, refused limited discovery and that the trial court erred in affirming the award.

"Appellant avers that the trial court's holding constitutes an error of law, as it embodies a mischaracterization of appellant's argument," Bender said. "Appellant asserts that it never argued that the trial court should 'reconsider evidence and testimony that the arbitrator already considered[,]' but that the arbitrator 'never considered evidence that was crucial to the issue being arbitrated[.]' We deem appellant's claim to be meritless."

Toll Brothers argued that Horn Williamson, which represented the homeowners, employed unreasonable billing practices and that the arbitrator refused to hear evidence to that point by declining to admit invoices related to the firm's representation of other homeowners.

"We deem appellant's averment that [the arbitrator] failed to allow it to reference the invoices of the other homeowners to be a clear misrepresentation. Moreover, the record refutes appellant's allegation that the arbitrator failed to consider evidence of Horn Williamson's overbilling," Bender said. "The arbitrator was present for, and had the opportunity to consider, appellant's extensive cross-examination of Ms. Horn, in addition to its direct-examination of Sandra Hadley, appellant's expert witness in the field of forensic accounting and fraud examination. It was within the province of the arbitrator to accept or reject the records. Thus, we discern no abuse of discretion or error of law in the trial court's refusal to vacate the arbitration award on these grounds."

The court also found Toll Brothers' argument that the arbitrator improperly refused to allow limited discovery unpersuasive.

Additionally, the Superior Court rejected Toll Brothers' argument that the arbitrator should not have ruled on the issue of attorney fees, claiming it was not before him.

"Given that both parties requested attorneys' fees in connection with the arbitration proceeding, we discern that the arbitrator had the authority to award such fees," Bender said. "Thus, the trial court properly refused to vacate the award of attorneys' fees incurred in the arbitration."

Jennifer Horn of Horn Williamson represented the plaintiffs.

:In this case, Toll Brothers set unrealistic and unfair demands, demanding that Horn Williamson individually negotiate complex repair agreements for defective stucco homes with more than 60 different families within a very short time period. Horn Williamson attorneys were caused to work around the clock to satisfy Toll Brother's imposed deadlines," Horn said in an email. "Per Toll Brother's demands, if Horn Williamson deviated from its settlement instructions in any way, the settlement offers would be withdrawn. Horn Williamson attorneys acted tirelessly in the best interests of their clients under very difficult circumstances."

John Hare of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin represented Toll Brothers and declined to comment.