Light-Age, Incorporated v. Clifford Ashcroft-Smith, 922 F.3d 320

Ashcroft‑Smith (attorney) provided legal services to Light‑Age over ~5 years; Light‑Age disputed $344,990.58 in fees as excessive.
Parties agreed to arbitrate under the Houston Bar Association Fee Dispute Committee (FDC) rules, which require three‑member panels with one non‑lawyer and prohibit non‑lawyers from having financial interests in law practice.
The FDC appointed Ana Davis as the non‑lawyer arbitrator; Davis was a payroll manager for law firm Jackson Walker, L.L.P., a fact shown in her email signature but allegedly not discovered by Light‑Age before the hearing.
Light‑Age (represented by CEO Don Heller, pro se) did not object to Davis’s participation at the arbitration hearing; after the award ($274,813.58) issued and Light‑Age learned of Davis’s employment, Light‑Age objected to the panel composition.
Light‑Age petitioned the district court to vacate the award; the district court confirmed the award, finding Davis qualified; Light‑Age appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Light‑Age may vacate arbitration award based on improper composition of panel	Panel was improperly constituted because the non‑lawyer arbitrator worked for a law firm, violating FDC rule	Objection was waived because Light‑Age failed to object at hearing; Davis was qualified under FDC rules	Waived: court applies constructive‑knowledge standard and affirms award
Whether constructive‑knowledge waiver applies to §5 vacatur claims	Different statutory vacatur provision (§5) requires different rule; no waiver if not timely objected	Constructive‑knowledge standard should apply to preserve finality and efficiency	Constructive‑knowledge standard applies; party must timely object or is deemed to have waived

Rainier DSC 1, L.L.C. v. Rainier Capital Mgmt., L.P., 828 F.3d 362 (5th Cir. 2016) (standard of review for confirmation of arbitration awards)
Brook v. Peak Int’l, Ltd., 294 F.3d 668 (5th Cir. 2002) (objections to panel composition must be raised at hearing)
Bernstein Seawell & Kove v. Bosarge, 813 F.2d 726 (5th Cir. 1987) (same—timely objection requirement)
Gateway Techs., Inc. v. MCI Telecommc’ns Corp., 64 F.3d 993 (5th Cir. 1995) (parties must preserve arbitration objections for later review)
Goldman, Sachs & Co. v. Athena Venture Partners, L.P., 803 F.3d 144 (3d Cir. 2015) (applies constructive‑knowledge waiver for arbitrator conflicts)
Lucent Techs., Inc. v. Tatung Co., 379 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 2004) (same—constructive knowledge leads to waiver)
Hall St. Assocs. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008) (relevant to limits on judicial vacatur standards)