Opinion ID: 2785613
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Arbitration Ruling

Text: In March 2013, the arbitration panel denied Fenyk's motion to amend his Statement of Claim, finding that the request was untimely and there were no special circumstances alleged to justify such relief. At the same time, however, the panel granted 3 RJFS addressed only Fenyk's request made at the hearing to add an ADA claim, as Fenyk's written motion also seeking to add claims under New York and Florida law was submitted on the same date as RJFS's post-hearing brief. -6- what it described as a request from both parties that Florida law be applied to the proceedings.4 The panel subsequently refused to reconsider its denial of Fenyk's motion to amend. The arbitrators announced their ruling on the merits in late April 2013, issuing only a brief statement of their conclusions. See Zayas v. Bacardi Corp., 524 F.3d 65, 70 (1st Cir. 2008) (Although arbitrators frequently elect to explain their decisions in written opinions, they are under no compulsion to do so.). We reproduce here the complete Award section of their decision. After considering the pleadings, the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, and the post-hearing submissions, the Panel has decided in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination as follows:
Claimant compensatory damages in the amount of $600,000.00 for back pay on his claim of discrimination based on disability.
Claimant attorneys' fees in the amount of $33,627.50 plus litigation expenses in the amount of $2,414.53 pursuant to paragraph 22(b) of the contract between the parties and §760.11(5) of the Florida Civil Rights Act. 4 Although the record does not show that Fenyk expressly asked that Florida law be applied to the dispute, the panel reasonably inferred such a request. Not only did Fenyk seek to add a discrimination claim under Florida law, but he also observed at the close of the arbitration hearing that Florida law probably will apply and, in his post-hearing brief, suggested that Florida or New York law would apply depending upon where the employment contract was signed. On appeal, Fenyk states that both parties agree that Florida law governs their dispute. -7-
claims of statutory discrimination [] is denied.
addressed herein, including punitive damages, is denied. The panel also assessed RJFS roughly $20,000 in arbitration fees.