2022 Ohio 1403
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- OPBA (union) arbitrated a grievance under a collective-bargaining agreement; the arbitrator denied the grievance.
- OPBA filed a document titled "Complaint: Application to Vacate Arbitration Award" and had it served on the City of Cleveland’s law department within three months, but did not serve the outside law firm that actually represented the city in the arbitration.
- Cleveland moved to confirm the award and to strike/dismiss OPBA’s filing for improper form and defective service; the trial court initially denied Cleveland’s motion but later, after this court’s CPPA decision, granted reconsideration, dismissed the complaint, and confirmed the award.
- On appeal, the Eighth District reviewed whether R.C. 2711.13 requires a motion (not a complaint), whether service must be on the attorney who represented the party in the arbitration, and whether failure to serve that attorney within three months deprives the court of jurisdiction.
- The court held that R.C. 2711.13 requires a motion (not a complaint), service must be made per Civ.R. 5(B) on the attorney who represented the party in the arbitration (when outside counsel appeared), and failure to serve that attorney within three months is jurisdictional — thus the court confirmed the arbitrator’s award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (OPBA) | Defendant's Argument (Cleveland) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper form: must the challenge be a motion under R.C. 2711.13 or may it be a complaint? | Complaint suffices; courts sometimes construe complaints as motions. | Statute and precedent require a motion; complaint here lacked required motion elements. | Must be a motion; the complaint did not meet statutory requirements and was improperly filed. |
| Service: is service on the city (law department) sufficient when outside counsel represented the city in arbitration? | Service on the city/law director satisfied R.C. 2711.13 and Civ.R. 5(B). | Service must be on the attorney who actually represented the party in the arbitration; service on law dept. was insufficient. | Service must be on the attorney who represented the party in the arbitration; service on law dept. was insufficient here. |
| Timeliness/jurisdiction: did OPBA perfect service within three months? | Served the city within three months, so timely. | Not served on arbitration counsel within three months; failure to do so is jurisdictional. | Not timely as to the proper recipient (outside counsel); failure to serve counsel within three months deprived the court of jurisdiction to vacate. |
| Certificate of service / Civ.R. 5 compliance | Certificate not required if complaint construed as motion or clerk service sufficed. | Motions require a certificate of service under Civ.R. 5(B)(4); none was provided. | Lack of certificate reinforced that filing failed to comply with motion/service rules; court sustained Cleveland’s procedural objections. |
Key Cases Cited
- Portage Cty. Bd. of Dev. Disabilities v. Portage Cty. Educators’ Assn., 103 N.E.3d 804 (Ohio 2018) (standard of review; law questions de novo)
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc., 473 U.S. 614 (1985) (arbitration’s objective is streamlined, expeditious resolution)
- Hayes v. Oakridge Home, 908 N.E.2d 408 (Ohio 2009) (arbitration is favored as expeditious and economical)
- Schaefer v. Allstate Ins. Co., 590 N.E.2d 1242 (Ohio 1992) (arbitration favored for expediency)
- Cox v. Dayton Pub. Schools Bd. of Edn., 64 N.E.3d 977 (Ohio 2016) (service under R.C. 2711.13 must comply with Civ.R. 5(B))
- Mun. Constr. Equip. Operators’ Labor Council v. Cleveland, 965 N.E.2d 1040 (Ohio App. 2011) (three-month deadline in R.C. 2711.13 is mandatory and jurisdictional)
- Warren Edn. Assn. v. Warren City Bd. of Edn., 480 N.E.2d 456 (Ohio 1985) (common pleas court must grant confirmation absent a timely motion to vacate or modify)
- Russo v. Chittick, 48 Ohio App.3d 101 (Ohio App. 1988) (court must grant confirmation if motion is within one year and no timely vacatur is shown)