Alabama Court of Civil Appeals Offers Guidance Regarding the Time for Appeal of Arbitration Awards
In Yayman, the trial court entered an arbitration award on May 9, 2007 pursuant to Ala. Code 6-6-12 and 6-6-15. On May 15, 2007, the appellant filed a motion to vacate that order, arguing that she was not afforded the statutory ten days to object to the award. The appellant did not file a notice of appeal at that time or within ten days of notice of the award. In arguing that her appeal was nonetheless timely, she argued to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals that Ala. Code 6-6-15 prevents a trial court from confirming an arbitration award in the face of an objection. The court, however, disagreed with this interpretation.
Although Yayman had filed her objections at that time, she had not filed a notice of appeal. Moreover, although Yayman filed a motion to vacate the judgment on May 15, 2007, the trial court did not set aside its judgment within 10 days of its entry. Therefore, pursuant to 6-6-15, the judgment became final on May 19, 2007. The court stated that once the 10-day period for the trial court to act expires and the judgment entered on an arbitration award becomes final pursuant to 6-6-15, any notice of appeal that was filed within 10 days after notice of the award "quickens" and the trial court loses jurisdiction to act further. However, there was no previously filed notice of appeal that could become effective at that point. Although the record did not reflect when Yayman received notice of the arbitrator's award, the court presumed that it was no later than April 4, 2007, the date that Yayman filed her answer to FIA's application to confirm the award. As Yayman's notice of appeal was not filed until August 20, 2007, it was untimely.
The court alternatively reasoned that even if Rule 4(a)(1) extends the time for filing a notice of appeal from 10 days to 42 days, Yayman neither filed her notice of appeal within 42 days of April 4, 2007, the date by which she must have had notice of the award, nor within 42 days of May 19, 2007, the date that the judgment became final pursuant to 6-6-15.
Consequently, Yayman's appeal was dismissed as untimely.
