Minkowitz v. Israeli
433 N.J. Super. 111
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2013Background
- Barbara Minkowitz and Ron Israeli agreed to arbitrate all financial issues (custody nonbinding) and appointed a single arbitrator and a joint forensic accountant (Seymour Rubin). A consent order confirming arbitration was filed in the Family Part.
- After preliminary conferences, the parties engaged in settlement discussions/mediation (with Rubin and the arbitrator participating) and executed four written settlement documents in 2009 (including a July 8, 2009 Memorandum of Understanding) that resolved most financial issues.
- Plaintiff later substituted counsel and sought Rubin’s underlying financial workpapers; Rubin and the arbitrator limited access. Plaintiff moved to recuse the arbitrator and to compel documents before both the arbitrator and the Family Part.
- The arbitrator issued multiple awards/orders incorporating the 2009 agreements and making additional substantive rulings (including child-support calculations and fee allocations); the Family Part confirmed those awards. Plaintiff sought vacatur under the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act (N.J.S.A. 2A:23B-23) and Rule 4:50-1.
- The Appellate Division affirmed the enforceability of the 2009 mediated settlement agreements but held that an arbitrator who acted as a mediator may not thereafter resume the role of arbitrator absent explicit party agreement; several arbitration-derived orders were vacated and the case remanded to appoint a new arbitrator to decide unresolved financial issues and document-production disputes.
Issues
| Issue | Minkowitz's Argument | Israeli's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity/enforceability of the 2009 agreements (mediation-derived) | 2009 agreements were not products of valid arbitration and should be vacated | Agreements were knowing, voluntary mediated settlements and are enforceable | Enforced: 2009 mediated agreements are valid and need not be vacated |
| Whether an arbitrator who facilitates/mediates may later act as arbitrator on the same disputes | Arbitrator’s mediation role tainted neutrality; awards after mediation should be vacated | Parties consented to the arbitrator; broad arbitral powers permit his actions | Held: Absent a clear prior agreement, a neutral who acts as mediator may not later resume as arbitrator; post-mediation arbitral awards based on that role must be vacated |
| Entitlement to underlying financial documents (Rubin’s workpapers) | Plaintiff entitled to copies under the arbitration agreement and Statement of Rights; denial prejudiced her ability to litigate | Defendant resisted disclosure; relied on arbitral discretion and confidentiality/protective order | Held: Contract and protective order granted right to documents; the arbitrator improperly barred production and that ruling (and confirmations enforcing it) was vacated; new arbitrator to address production requests |
| Vacatur of specific arbitration awards (procedural fairness, partiality, exceeded powers) | Awards procured by undue means, arbitrator biased, exceeded powers; should be vacated | Awards should be confirmed; challenges untimely or meritless; courts should defer under the Act | Held: Narrow review applied. Court affirmed enforcement of mediated settlements but vacated arbitral decisions issued after the arbitrator acted as mediator (including fee award and child-support finding made post-mediation). Remaining unresolved financial issues remanded for new arbitrator |
Key Cases Cited
- Hojnowski v. Vans Skate Park, 187 N.J. 323 (explains arbitration as a favored, private, expeditious forum)
- Fawzy v. Fawzy, 199 N.J. 456 (addresses arbitration in family law and limits on court intervention once arbitration chosen)
- Faherty v. Faherty, 97 N.J. 99 (upholds arbitration of matrimonial financial disputes as consistent with public policy)
- Barcon Assocs., Inc. v. Tri-County Asphalt Corp., 86 N.J. 179 (arbitration is a substitute for litigation; courts should not convert arbitration into litigation)
- Tretina v. Fitzpatrick & Assocs., 135 N.J. 349 (describes narrow circumstances and heavy burden to vacate arbitral awards)
- Linden Bd. of Educ. v. Linden Educ. Ass’n, 202 N.J. 268 (courts generally favor confirmation of arbitration awards)
- Willingboro Mall, Ltd. v. 240/242 Franklin Ave., L.L.C., 215 N.J. 242 (mediated agreements incorporated into signed writing are enforceable; mediation confidentiality rules)
- Johnson v. Johnson, 204 N.J. 529 (arbitrator’s broad discretion over procedure; written agreements may impose specific procedural requirements)
- Isaacson v. Isaacson, 348 N.J. Super. 560 (distinguishes mediator’s facilitative role from evaluator/advisor; disallows certain dual roles)
- Manger v. Manger, 417 N.J. Super. 370 (upheld arbitrator’s broad discovery and case-management discretion in family-arbitration context)