Arbitration Case Statement For Multiple Columns In Hillsborough
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
The brief should include identification of the parties, a concise description of the facts, and applicable case law and statutes. The briefs should be submitted to the arbitrator at least 2 days prior to the arbitration hearing.
Arguments should flow easily from the relevant facts and applicable law. Avoid exaggerating the strengths of your case as well as disparaging the opposing side. Remember that professionalism and credibility are critical to persuasiveness.
Even if there were no pre-hearing briefs, keep your open- ing short, providing an executive sum- mary of your case in chronological order without getting into the weeds. Try to sum up some key points in phraseology the arbitrator will remember. If you have compelling evidence, mention it.
Because of limited discovery, lack of a jury, and limited appeal rights, arbitration outcomes are riskier and more final than court litigation. It is hard to see why arbitration would be fairer than court litigation. Arbitration is litigation, just not in court.
No, CASE is a function, and can only return a single value. I think you are going to have to duplicate your CASE logic. The other option would be to wrap the whole query with an IF and have two separate queries to return results.
Much like the opening statement in a trial, your arbitration statement should lay out what the “evidence” – the written material – will show regarding the proper credit on the project. The Arbitration Statement is not established fact, just your assessment of the material.
Always get straight to the merits without berating the other side or whining about how badly it has treated you. Another threat to your credibility is the “kitchen sink” arbitration demand or a response that includes numerous claims or defenses that have little chance of succeeding.
Each party shall appoint one arbitrator. The two arbitrators thus appointed shall choose the third arbitrator who will act as the presiding arbitrator.
With a single arbitrator, there is no one to identify those mistakes. A mistake is less likely to make it into the award where there are three arbitrators providing input. In most cases, each arbitrator has different strengths and weaknesses which helps produce a better result.
Clauses providing for three arbitrators pursuant to which disputes involving multiple (i.e. more than two) parties are likely to be resolved should make particular provision for the appointment of arbitrators designed to ensure that the appointment process works fairly as between the claimant and respondent “sides”.
