DRB, Inc. v. Keller, W.
DRB, Inc. v. Keller, W. No. 1061 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Feb 27, 2017Background
- Keller contracted with DRB on March 18, 2013 for delivery/installation of a prefabricated home for $106,645; DRB sued in September 2013 for the remaining balance and additional damages.
- The contract contained a clause requiring mediation as a condition precedent and binding arbitration for disputes (Contract ¶ 18).
- Parties agreed in principle to arbitrate but could not agree on specific arbitrators; DRB moved to compel Keller to execute an Agreement for Reference under York County Civil Rule 1301(c).
- The trial court ordered referral to arbitration; the court administrator then appointed a York County bar panel; the arbitrators awarded DRB $126,538.18 plus attorneys’ fees and denied Keller’s counterclaim.
- Keller filed a timely notice of appeal seeking a trial de novo; DRB moved to quash the appeal arguing the arbitration was voluntary and binding; the trial court granted the motion and confirmed the award.
- On appeal, Keller raised waiver of arbitration, whether the court substituted statutory arbitration for voluntary arbitration, and whether his right to appeal/statutory trial de novo was improperly denied; the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Keller's Argument | DRB's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DRB waived the right to enforce voluntary arbitration | DRB waived arbitration by initiating judicial process instead of enforcing arbitration clause | DRB relied on the contract and correspondence showing mutual agreement to arbitrate and sought court assistance to convene panel | Waived issue (not raised in Rule 1925(b)), deemed forfeited on appeal |
| Whether court substituted statutory (compulsory) arbitration for voluntary arbitration | Keller: he did not agree to statutory arbitration and sought trial de novo under 42 Pa.C.S. § 7361(d) | DRB: parties contractually agreed to binding arbitration; court merely facilitated selection of arbitrators under local rule | Keller’s claim waived for lack of development in briefing; court correctly treated arbitration as voluntary/binding |
| Whether Keller retained statutory right to appeal / trial de novo after arbitration | Keller: award should be subject to trial de novo (compulsory arbitration rules) | DRB: arbitration was nonstatutory (contractual), governed by 42 Pa.C.S. § 7341; awards are binding absent fraud/irregularity | Rejected—amount in controversy exceeded $50,000 so compulsory arbitration inapplicable; contractual arbitration was binding and non-appealable absent fraud/irregularity |
| Whether there were grounds to vacate the award (fraud/irregularity) | Keller did not allege fraud or procedural irregularity | DRB: no fraud/irregularity alleged; award final under § 7341(d) | No grounds alleged; award confirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Goral v. Fox Ridge, Inc., 683 A.2d 931 (Pa. Super. 1996) (waiver of arbitration can be inferred from acts inconsistent with enforcing arbitration clause)
- Fastuca v. L.W. Molar & Assocs., 950 A.2d 980 (Pa. Super. 2008) (appellate review of legal questions regarding right to appeal from arbitration is plenary)
- Trombetta v. Raymond James Financial Servs., 907 A.2d 550 (Pa. Super. 2006) (arbitration agreements favored as public policy to reduce litigation)
- Umbelina v. Adams, 34 A.3d 151 (Pa. Super. 2011) (issues inadequately developed or lacking citation are waived)
- In re Est. of Daubert, 757 A.2d 962 (Pa. Super. 2000) (issues not raised in a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) statement are waived)