Fastuca v. L.W. Molnar & Associates, 10 A.3d 1230

Partnership formed in 1972: Diane Fastuca and siblings owned L.W. Molnar & Associates; partnership managed real estate investments for ~26 years with no major disputes until 1998.
In 2003 Fastuca notified dissolution under Uniform Partnership Act §8353(2); 2003–2004 litigation led to arbitration under AAA rules per partnership agreement.
Arbitrator September 17, 2004 Findings: dissolution valid under §8353(2) but wrongful dissolution damages against Fastuca; ordered value calculation and access to partnership records; arbitrator retained jurisdiction for valuation and further disputes.
Arbitrator issued multiple post-2004 orders addressing document production, valuation process, and further hearings; disputes over discovery and document disclosure continued for years.
June 26, 2007, trial court terminated the ongoing arbitration and directed partition; Superior Court reversed termination and reinstated arbitration; Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted allocatur to review both statutory and equitable-intervention questions.
Court ultimately held that the arbitrator’s September 17, 2004 Findings were not a final award under §7341, and the trial court had no inherent equitable authority to terminate the arbitration pre-award; arbitration should proceed to a final award.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the arbitrator's September 17, 2004 findings were a final award under §7341.	Fastuca argues findings were interlocutory and not a final award.	Molnar argues findings were not an award subject to §7341.	Findings were not a final award; §7341 review did not apply.
Whether a trial court may terminate ongoing common law arbitration before a final award on equitable grounds.	Fastuca asserts equitable power to end futile arbitration and protect rights.	Molnar maintains no equity power pre-award; statutory remedies suffice.	Trial court cannot terminate pre-award; no inherent equitable authority to end arbitration.

Great American Ins. Co. v. American Arb. Assoc., 436 Pa. 370 (1970) (finality requirement; interlocutory findings not an award; no equitable review before final award)
Harleysville Mut. v. Adair, 421 Pa. 141 (1966) (equity not available to challenge interlocutory arbitration rulings; AAA controls discovery; statutory relief preferred)
Duquesne Light v. Upper St. Clair, 377 Pa. 323 (1954) (irreparable-harm and lack of adequate remedy at law justify equitable intervention in some contexts)
Mattos v. Thompson, 491 Pa. 385 (1980) (arbitration delays may raise due process concerns; cautions against equitable relief in mandatory arbitration contexts)
Everett v. Harron, 380 Pa. 123 (1955) (equity may protect rights when statutory remedies are inadequate; context of due process protection)