What Are the Risks of Arbitration in a Maryland Divorce?

Most Maryland divorce cases are resolved without the need for courtroom litigation. Even if the parties have difficulty reaching an agreement on certain issues, there are still alternative forms of dispute resolution they can turn to, such as mediation or arbitration. But it is important to understand the limits, and potential risks, of such methods.

Appellate Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Decision Modifying Alimony Award

Indeed, there is often a misunderstanding about the difference between mediation and arbitration. Mediation is where a neutral third party helps the parties to reach an agreement. In divorce mediation, the mediator is not there to act as a judge or take sides, but rather to help the parties reach a settlement agreement they can both accept and implement.

Arbitration is quite different. When parties to any type of dispute, not just divorce, agree to arbitration, they are asking a third party to essentially conduct a private trial. An arbitrator conducts a hearing according to certain established arbitration procedures and issues a final decision, known as an award, that is then legally binding on both parties. And if either side is dissatisfied with the arbitrator’s award, their options for appeal are often limited.

A recent decision from the Appellate Court of Maryland, McCutcheon v. McCutcheon, provides an apt illustration. In this case, a husband and wife separated after 34 years of marriage. The husband subsequently filed for divorce. Nearly four years later, they signed a separation of agreement that, among other things, provided for the former husband to pay spousal support to the former wife.

The agreement further provided that upon the former husband’s retirement, both sides would agree to mediation on the question of whether to modify or terminate the spousal support obligation. If the parties failed to reach an agreement after mediation, the matter would be subject to binding arbitration.

About a year after the couple’s divorce became final, the former husband retired and moved to terminate, or alternatively reduce, his spousal support obligation. Mediation failed to produce an agreement, so both sides proceeded to arbitration. The arbitrator subsequently issued an award reducing the former husband’s alimony obligations until December 2025, when it would terminate outright.

The former wife then filed a motion in Maryland Circuit Court to vacate (overturn) the arbitrator’s award. While the Circuit Court granted the former wife’s motion, the Appellate Court reversed and reinstated the award. As the Appellate Court explained in its decision, the arbitrator did not exceed his authority, as agreed to between the parties. Nor did the arbitrator make a “palpable mistake” or disregard the law to the point where the courts could intervene and vacate the award. The former wife simply objected to how the arbitrator weighed the evidence, which the Appellate Court said was not subject to judicial review.

Contact a La Plata Spousal Support Lawyer Today

How you decide to resolve a family law dispute can often make a significant difference in the outcome. That is why it is important to work with an experienced La Plata spousal support lawyer who can represent and defend your interests. Contact Fanning Law today at 301-934-3620 to schedule a consultation. We serve clients in LaPlata, Waldorf, and Lexington Park.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10460433172019965374