Member input sought on section Amicus request
July 12, 2005 - The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Section
requests authorization to file an amicus brief in Borst v. Allstate
Insurance Co., currently before the Court of Appeals.
At issue is:
1. Evident partiality of an arbitrator [s. 788.10(1)(b)] has been
discussed and defined in Richco Structures v. Parkside Village,
82 Wis.2d 547 (1978) and DeBaker v. Shah, 194 Wis.2d 104 (1995).
Does an arbitrator who is a named member of a law firm, regularly
retained by the insurance company party to the arbitration, have evident
partiality which disqualifies him or her? Or, is it sufficient that the
"suspect" arbitrator make a full disclosure at the outset of the
arbitration proceeding and make a declaration of impartiality? See
DeBaker, 194 Wis.2d at 114.
2. Section 788.08 provides that the arbitrators may approve the
petition of a party to a court of record for permission to conduct a
deposition. Do the arbitrators have the authority to permit or prohibit
all over forms of discovery during arbitration proceeding?
At the request of Hon. Daniel P. Anderson, the section intends to
submit an Amicus brief to assist the Court of Appeals in its
deliberation.
The Board of Governors will consider the request on July 22, 2005.
Timely member input on whether the Section amicus should be authorized
is invited and will be considered. Please comments to Lisa Roys, Government Relations
coordinator, by July 20. Comments received by the deadline will be
included in the Board of Governors materials.
