Unlike mediation, an arbitrator does have the power to decide the case.  In fact, he acts both as judge and jury.  The advantage over a litigation is that the process is more informal and, usually, more expedited.  There are no months of pleadings, years of discovery or multiple pre-trial motions.  The rules of evidence don’t strictly apply during the hearing.  Often, each side simply submits a brief to the arbitrator.  The parties then appear before him for a one-day hearing, and he issues a final decision shortly thereafter. 
   
Like most things in life, however, the arbitration process isn’t perfect.  For one thing, there’s a perception that arbitrators tend to “split the baby” – they try to be like King Solomon by giving something to each side.  The lack of an all-or-nothing result can be frustrating to the parties.  At Limacs, though, we’re committed to deciding each case by applying the applicable legal principles to the facts wherever possible, so that our decisions are not arbitrary compromises.

In addition, arbitrators generally are not required to write reasoned decisions that explain their awards.  This is unsatisfying to most parties, who can’t tell how or why the arbitrator ruled as he did.   At Limacs, however, if both parties agree at the outset of the process, Roy Klein will prepare and circulate to them a written decision explaining his determinations. 

What happens if the losing party in a Limacs arbitration refuses to pay the award that Roy Klein issues?  Under both New York State and federal law, the prevailing party can start a court proceeding to have the arbitration award converted into an enforceable court judgment, so that he can proceed to enforce the judgment. 

Despite these perceived drawbacks, arbitration is still often a quicker, more cost-effective option than litigation to settle a dispute.