- 5 -
On August 29, 2003, the arbitrator submitted his written
findings to the parties and the Court.3 On October 6, 2003,
petitioners filed a motion to delay entering the arbitrator’s
findings in the record. In their motion, petitioners note that
the arbitrator’s written findings include this statement:
Mr. Williams [petitioners’ consultant] correctly points
out that if all of the behind-the-pipe reserves were
immediately completed to produce, the discount for time
would be greatly reduced. However, there has been no
information provided to me that this practice had
become a standard procedure in 1993, or even since that
date. [Emphasis added.]
Petitioners argue that by failing to request the information
alluded to in the just-quoted passage, the arbitrator “reached
his conclusion as to the fair market value of the subject wells
without the benefit of * * * full and complete data and
information with respect to an essential element of Petitioners’
presentation.”
On October 23, 2003, respondent filed his opposition to
petitioners’ motion.
Discussion
Under Rule 124, “The parties may move that any factual issue
in controversy be resolved through voluntary binding
arbitration.” Rule 124(a). The parties must attach to their
motion requesting arbitration “a stipulation executed by each
3 Contrary to the terms of the arbitration agreement, the
parties have not submitted the arbitrator’s written findings to
the Court.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011