Menu
Log in
Forgot password

Association for Conflict Resolution - Greater New York Chapter↑

Search
Log in
Forgot password

Order Denying a Motion

Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:26 PM | Anonymous

How much explanation should be provided in an order denying a motion (such a motion for summary disposition)?  Is less more, or does the arbitrator owe the moving party some rationale for denying the motion?

What are your thoughts?


Comments

  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:41 PM | Rick Mahrle
    The reasoning behind the denial, particulary a Motion for Summary Judgment should be provided in order to identify the factual or legal issues that will need to be addressed during the evidentiary hearing.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Friday, August 01, 2025 6:26 PM | Judge Gene Cohen ((Ret.)
      Denials of motions for summary judgment should include a paragraph indicating that the motion was actually read by stating generally the rationale for the decision.
      Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:44 PM | David E. Robbins
    Unless the decision of the motion is case determinative, then less is best. Remember folks - This is still arbitration and not court.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:48 PM | Nasri H Barakat
    I believe that the arbitrator and or the panel should provide clarity while deciding any issue. Denying a Motion for Summary Judgment is no exception. If oral arguments are requested and granted then the arbitrator and or the panel with focused questioning of the parties can also provide an indication of their rationale. The final decision should also include the reasons why the motion was denied. The clarity, when provided could help the parties with their respective witnesses and at the hearing and closing arguments as well.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Sunday, August 03, 2025 1:05 PM | Frank Carroll
      I agree completely. The ultimate credibility of arbitration depends on the confidence counsel and parties have in the arbitration process. The best way to instill that confidence is to demonstrate to the parties that you as the arbitrator considered the issues raised and addressed those issues.
      Link  •  Reply
    • Wednesday, August 13, 2025 2:29 PM | Igor Ellyn
      I agree
      Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:50 PM | Marc Elliott
    I had this issue before me just last week and denied leave to file a dispositive motion (under the Consumer Arb Rules). I think that the parties do not submit such requests casually so therefore they are entitled to some rationale. But that should be balanced by a recognition that arbitration is not litigation and a fulsome explanation of the arbitrator's rationale is not required nor should it be expected.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:52 PM | Anonymous
    For what it's worth, I had a judge tell me, once, that she was told by the Court of Appeals NOT to write opinions when ruling on dispositive motions. That way, it was easier to the Court of Appeals to find a way to affirm the decision.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:54 PM | Roderick F. Mollison
      A court of appeal approaches a case with the presumption the trial court below was right and should be sustained.
      Link  •  
      Author
      Comment
       
    • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:16 PM | William King Hill
      Luckily, we arbitrators are generally not subject to appeal so we can and should defy that judge's advocated cowardice.
      Link  •  Reply
    • Wednesday, August 13, 2025 2:33 PM | Igor Ellyn
      I am in Toronto, Canada so our experience is different. Even if an appellate court shows deference to the arbitrator on factul findings, it seems to me that the appellate court needs cogent reasons for the award to assess if the arbitrator decided on the correct principles of law. If the appeal is a de novo hearing, that is another matter.
      Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:52 PM | Roderick F. Mollison
    Obviously, a motion for summary judgment not only is used to cut behind the complaint, it lays out the moving party's reasoning why there is no real factual issue involved, hence no need for a trial. Pointing out where the motion is inadequate or just plain wrong on the law can not only save the parties a lot of time it can push them to rethink settlement.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Thursday, July 31, 2025 10:33 PM | david Richman
      A well written, thorough order denying summary judgment can provide a good roadmap for the parties to consider settlement.
      Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:52 PM | Joe Cox
    I think this depends on the jurisdiction. In Texas, lawyers are used to getting short orders denying motions for summary judgment. If there is a fact issue, there is no need to write page after page describing the fact issue. As a former judge, less is more and less is all that is needed. The biggest issue is the delay in ruling that makes parties suffer. Ruling promptly is the key.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:54 PM | Jaime Ramon
    I've granted a MSJ twice. I provided basic underlying facts in my decisions in both to support the legal conclusion. I try to provide a basis for my decision for a reasoned award.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:55 PM | Kevin Sido
    I agree with the comments of those posters who believe a rationale should be provided. The point is not to provoke motions for rehearing and such but to provide the parties guidance. Moreover, the parties have paid a substantial fee to file the matter and to counsel to present the motion; surely we owe a rationale in return.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 3:56 PM | J W Cartagena
    I agree with Mr. Robbins. Less is normally best. One should avoid the "over-legalization" of the process. As he says, this is arbitration, not court. The more one writes, the more one creates a record on which a losing party will seek to overturn the award.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:07 PM | Judge Richard B Klein (ret.)
    When I was on the intermediate appellate court, on summary judgments or in general, there might be an effort to have the Supreme Court hear it, so I would generally write reasonably thorough opinions. In arbitration, I see no need to respond to every argument the losing party throws against the wall to see what will stick. Instead, I prefer to just write a short memorandum explaining the basic reasons for the decision. If it's denying a dispositive motion, it can be even shorter.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:08 PM | B. J. KRINTZMAN
    I ALWAYS provide reasoning and the factual basis on which I decided a Motion. (Particularly critical for a Motion for Summary Judgment!) This not only gives counsel guidance, but it also helps counsel explain to their client why I decided how I decided. This can only serve to foster consumer trust in the arbitration process.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:08 PM | Jerry Hoover
    My philosophy, generally, is: Less is More!
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:09 PM | Leslie W Langbein
    I think it depends on the kind of case. In the employment arena, arbitration is just a change of forum. Parties are entitled to discovery and we can order all the remedies that a court can provide under law. Therefore, an order issued by an arbitrator ought to provide the same type of explanation of reasoning that a judge might issue. Less complex matters might not require the same degree of explanation.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:13 PM | William King Hill
    The arbitrator owes the parties an explanation. There is a hierarch of motions. If there is a simple request for more time or a minor scheduling issue, a simple "granted" or "denied" is fine. On an important procedural motion, like limiting or allowing discovery, an explanation serves to guide counsel and the parties. At the summary disposition point, if the arbitrator/panel has gotten to the point of allowing the motion to proceed, then owes counsel and the parties the reasoning for denial, and it should not be merely "rarely granted," or "issues remain for hearing." Without pre-judging, the arbitrator or panel can highlight what issues remain. Such an explanation can help counsel prepare for the hearing on concentrate on what is most important, promoting efficiency.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:14 PM | Debra A. Jenks, Esq.
    Depends on the case, the arbitration agreement, and request for details by the parties. At a minimum, a simple but concise explanation for the denial should be given.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:17 PM | Michael H. Diamant
    Parties submitting a motion which is ultimately denied, whether dispositive or not, is entitled to a full explanation as to the reasons for the denial. The reasoning should address all issues raised, and what was missing that prevented the motion from being granted, whether it one or more factual issues and/or legal issues. It focuses the parties on the issues to be addressed at the evidentiary hearing and demonstrates that the arbitrator has reviewed and analyzed the motion and submissions.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:17 PM | Reese Henderson
    It depends on the motion. If an explanation of the denial will help focus the issues for the final hearing, I am happy to provide it. If the motion is just re-arguing a prior ruling, I am likely to issue a simple denial with no explanation.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:39 PM | David Slaughter
      I agree entirely that it depends on the motion. I've been faced with motions seeking my identification of "undisputed" facts, in an effort to focus and hopefully truncate the evidentiary hearing. In those cases, I feel compelled to explain my ruling - especially on points that I consider to be disputed. But in other cases, a denial of a MSJ may be simply explained by confirming that key material facts are unresolved and must be properly addressed at an evidentiary hearing.
      Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:28 PM | Robert L. Arrington
    I always give my reasons. I don't ordinarily write a lengthy opinion.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:39 PM | Peter Rundle
    With the lawyerly caveat that, "It depends," I would distinguish between a motion to dismiss (legal issue) and motion for summary judgment (factual issues). I tend to provide more analysis and reasoning in denying a motion to dismiss because the legal analysis tends to be static. There is no reason to delay articulating the "rules of the road," as it were. On the other hand, providing too much analysis of the factual issues in denying a summary judgment motion can be viewed as a premature determination of factual disputes. Accordingly, I tend to provide very short orders (e.g., "The Tribunal concludes, on the evidence presented, that there are genuine disputes of material fact. Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment is denied.")
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:41 PM | Karl Sieg
    Counsel is engaged to advocate for their client. So they may argue endlessly. I try not to provide that opportunity. But I do listen in case they mention something that I didn't consider or consider with sufficient weight.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 4:53 PM | Anonymous
    By and large, I provide at least a summary rational for whatever decision I make. If I were to entertain a MSJ (which I actively discourage), I would likely point out the more important factual disputes if I denied the motion. But not a lot more than that. I would definitely have a written explanation if I granted a motion that decided a case. I would look at that like what it is, a final award. The parties deserve to know why they won (or, especially, lost). On other motions, it depends. Sometimes, the parties will benefit from explicit direction on what documents need to be disclosed, for example.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Thursday, July 31, 2025 5:15 PM | Edwin H. Stern
      Some rules and contracts address when a reasoned opinion or summary opinion is to be used. I understand that some believe “less is best,” but I believe that in all cases some explanation for the decision is necessary and appropriate. I think faith in, and respect for, the arbitrator requires some explanation of the determination, even if not a plenary opinion. In any case, I write at least enough to set out what convinces me of the correctness of the opinion rendered. Sometimes writing an opinion can help lead to a better developed result..
      Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 5:20 PM | Lisa Renee Pomerantz
    I agree that a well-reasoned rationale for the arbitrator's decision is warranted. It demonstrates the arbitrator has considered the parties' arguments, enhancing confidence in the arbitrator and the process. It can also serve as a reality check on the parties and promote settlement. Finally, having to justify their decisions in writing encourages arbitrators to think through them more thoroughly.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 6:09 PM | Jack Levin
    The purpose of arbitration is to resolve disputes in the manner the parties have chosen. A dispositive motion can proceed only because the arbitrator has given permission or because the parties have agreed to it. In either case, the order should reveal some reasoning. The parties are entitled to guidance in preparing the case for hearing. Being opaque is not a way to save anyone time or money. If the arbitrator has confidence in the order, he/she should not fear criticism.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 6:22 PM | William M. Bankston
    The arbitrator should provide an explanation and rationale for denying a motion for summary disposition. This explanation is owed to the parties to the arbitration, not just the moving party. The rationale may have implications on other issues in the arbitration perhaps not considered by the arbitrator.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 6:30 PM | Jim Burgess
    I believe any ruling should be explained but not all rulings need extensive legal reasoning. When denying a request to file a dispositive motion, explaining simply why the request did not meet the standard is enough. For a dispositive motion, the parties should know why it is denied. Triable issues or insufficiency of the evidence should be identified. If the motion is denied based on the law, that too should be identified. But, I find that these explanations on denied motions are usually concise. Providing an adequate explanation helps parties understand the arbitration process, even if they disagree with the outcome, and ultimately promotes arbitration as a viable, neutral and unbiased alternative to the courts.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 7:07 PM | Charles Atwell
    In general, I think less is more on the denial. Some thoughtfulness needs to be given on one sustained .
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 8:43 PM | Hon. Alvin Zimmerman
    It depends on the case and also whether or not and the type of Final Award the parties requested and also whether the MSJ is totally dispositive of the case, a major part of the case or a minor point. I will write a reasoned SJ order depending upon a consideration of all these factors. I also generally favor a reasoned SJ order because since they can’t appeal, I want them to know that I carefully considered all the issues.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 8:43 PM | Anonymous
    While a tome is unnecessary, it is critically important to the Arbitration system and the good people who use it, as well as the good women and men who serve as Arbitrators, that a full explanation be given for our rulings, especially something as broad as a Dispositive Motion. The lawyers have to explain the outcome to their clients, and a complete explanation goes a long way to insure the integrity of the system.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Thursday, July 31, 2025 9:49 PM | Deborah Rothman
    This is another example of the way arbitration is different from, and superior to, litigation. We are selected, and paid, by the parties, and our caseloads are far lower than those of a trial judge. So it behooves us to provide the service expected, or at least hoped for, by the parties, which includes offering ways to streamline the proceeding by, among other things, offering insight into our thinking when making a Ruling or issuing an Order.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Friday, August 01, 2025 1:09 AM | Gregory Drutchas
      I am definitly in agreement with the contingent that, unless the parties mutually say they do not want one, on any motion some kind of statement for rationale should be provided even if one sentence for minor procedural issue. Something more substantive should be provided for denial of important motion where the parties have put legitimate briefs on the issue. As noted doing makes it clear you as arbitrator take their case seriously and may help the parties understand what the final issues in the case will likely be and why
      Link  •  Reply
  • Friday, August 01, 2025 4:43 AM | Geoffrey BH
    It may be sufficient to say that one was not satisfied that any action was necessary, If there was opposition one might express preference for the submission of Y over that of X,
    Link  •  Reply
  • Friday, August 01, 2025 7:05 AM | George M. Lobman
    In my current AAA cases I have not received one request for summary judgment. My cases are mostly the parties represent themselves or have a very qualified wife to lead the matter. I seriously have not had one in any single Arbitrator case.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Friday, August 01, 2025 11:12 AM | DL
    This is a question I put to the parties. If they want a "reasoned" decision, I will write one. This is their "party" and they get to set the rules, and obviously need to pay for the time to write the opinion. In my experience, they usually ask for a decision stating the basis for the opinion. I have also given the parties the opportunity to seek reconsideration, which obviously would be difficult or impossible without a reasoned opinion.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Friday, August 01, 2025 12:15 PM | Linda Bond Edwards
    I agree that providing some rationale for a denial is appropriate and that less is more. If the matter is proceeding to final hearing, the explanation may be helpful in preparing for the final hearing. I don't believe that providing a rationale to gives an incentive for parties to settle is part of my role as an operator. If the parties interpret an order in that way, that is certainly their choice.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Friday, August 01, 2025 12:17 PM | Edited by Linda Bond Edwards
      I agree that providing some rationale for a denial is appropriate and that less is more. If the matter is proceeding to final hearing, the explanation may be helpful in preparing for the final hearing. I don't believe that providing a rationale to give an incentive for parties to settle is part of my role as an arbitrator. If the parties interpret an order in that way, that is certainly their choice.
      Link  •  Reply
  • Saturday, August 02, 2025 1:03 PM | GARY W JAVORE
    Generally, less is more. But if the parties have requested a reasoned award. I will typically provide some rationale.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, August 04, 2025 1:04 AM | Paul Ngotho, Chartered Arbitrator. Nairobi, Kenya.
    Giving reasons is the default mode in arbitration unless the parties, who are the real bosses, have previously agreed that no reasons should be granted. The need for reasons applies to any award, application/motion or any contentious issue (eg. the determination of an arbitrator's fees in an ad hoc arbitration). The party which losses is entitled to know why it was not successful.
    Remember that in addition to the arbitration legislation and rules, there are a host of other legislations which apply in every jurisdiction. For example, Article 47 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, "if a right or fundamental freedom of a person has been or is likely to be adversely affected by administrative action, the person has the right to be given written reasons for the action".
    This means that a tribunal in an arbitration seated in Kenya must give reasons in sufficient and reasonable detail, the way a court would. This is a legal requirement leaves no room for an arbitrator's personal views on the matter. A decision (whether an award, or an application to amend etc) which is incomplete or sketch reasons cannot survive a constitutional challenge.
    In other countries, similar requirements are found in the respective fair administrative action legislations. I can see no good reason not to give reasons.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, August 04, 2025 6:14 PM | Perry L Taylor
    As is frequently the case, I don't believe there is a simple or one size fits all answer. It depends on the type of motion, the context and the posture and stage of tglhe proceeding. Having said that, less is always my preferred approach
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, August 04, 2025 8:43 PM | Perry L Taylor
    As is frequently the case, I don't believe there is a simple or one size fits all answer. It depends on the type of motion, the context and the posture and stage of tglhe proceeding. Having said that, less is always my preferred approach
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, August 04, 2025 8:46 PM | Perry L Taylor
    As is frequently the case, I don't believe there is a simple or one size fits all answer. It depends on the type of motion, the context and the posture and stage of tglhe proceeding. Having said that, less is always my preferred approach
    Link  •  Reply
Association for Conflict Resolution - Greater New York Chapter

© ACR-GNY

Contact Us

Email us at questions@acrgny.org

ACR-GNY's mission and programming are generously sponsored by:

ADR Notable: Dispute Resolution Management Made Easy

Discounts on ADR Notable platform available for ACR-GNY members!

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software