Opinion ID: 2585097
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Superior Court Correctly Refused To Award Sidney the Costs of the Arbitration Proceeding.

Text: Sidney next appeals the superior court's decision not to award her the costs she incurred in arbitration. But Sidney did not request an award of costs from the arbitration panel, and instead asked for arbitration costs in her April 2005 motion for summary judgment. The superior court rejected Sidney's request because she failed to pursue costs before the arbitration panel. Because Allstate informed Sidney that it would seek a trial de novo as provided for under the terms of its contract, [63] Sidney claims that (1) the arbitration panel may have lacked jurisdiction to determine costs, (2) Allstate's ultimate decision not to proceed with a trial cannot be used to prejudice her decision not to requests costs from the panel, [64] and (3) the superior court had the authority to enter an award for arbitration costs. But there is nothing to support her suggestion that Allstate's actions somehow prevented Sidney from seeking costs from the arbitration panel. Alaska Statute 09.43.100, which provides for fees and expenses of arbitration, states that [u]nless otherwise provided in the agreement to arbitrate, the arbitrators' expenses and fees, together with other expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be paid as provided in the award. The Allstate policy states that [a]ll expenses and fees, not including counsel fees or adjuster fees, incurred because of arbitration, will be paid as determined by the arbitrator. The panel's award ordered Allstate to pay the arbiters' fees and stated that the parties can submit motions for attorney's fees and costs, if necessary. Thus, regardless of Allstate's actions in deciding whether to pursue a trial de novo, Sidney had the duty to seek the costs of the arbitration if she wished to obtain them. But Sidney failed to submit a motion for costs to the panel. Moreover, the statutes that Sidney relies upon to assert that the trial court could independently award the costs of the arbitration are inapposite. Alaska Statute 09.43.170 grants the courts jurisdiction to enforce arbitration agreements and to enter judgment on an award, but does not grant independent jurisdiction to award costs where a party has failed to request them from the arbitrator. Alaska Statute 21.89.020(f)(1) merely provides that arbitration expenses incurred in insurance disputes shall be paid as determined by the arbitrator. Neither statute mandates the court's award of costs here. The trial court ruled that where a party desires costs associated with the arbitration, it is incumbent on the party to move for them. This Sidney failed to do. We therefore affirm the superior court's refusal to award Sidney her costs of arbitration.