By Lisa W. Timmons
Arbitration, traditionally viewed as a streamlined alternative to court, is widely used in commercial, construction, and international disputes. Its appeal lies in its perceived efficiency, confidentiality, and potential cost savings. However, as arbitration has become the preferred method for resolving complex disputes involving multiple parties, such as mass arbitration and complex commercial matters, the process has in many cases become as cumbersome and expensive as litigation. Long discovery phases, voluminous motion practice, and delays in scheduling hearings are some of the key issues. To address these challenges, the role of a process arbitrator has emerged, offering a promising solution to manage arbitration proceedings more effectively.
In essence, the process arbitrator ensures that procedural disputes—whether regarding discovery, scheduling, or other pre-hearing motions—are handled efficiently and fairly. This structure prevents procedural disputes from bogging down the substantive elements of the case and enables a more collaborative arbitration process.
The skill set of a process arbitrator is distinctly different from that of a substantive arbitrator. While a substantive arbitrator is typically an expert in the subject matter of the dispute, the process arbitrator is an expert in procedural efficiency and dispute management. The process arbitrator must have a deep knowledge of arbitration rules, discovery processes, and case management techniques. Their role is to ensure that the procedural elements, such as scheduling, discovery, and pre-hearing motions, are handled efficiently. This requires strong organizational and communication skills, as well as the ability to resolve procedural disputes quickly and fairly without delving into the merits of the case. On the other hand, the substantive arbitrator must focus on understanding the intricate details of the case, analyzing evidence, and applying the relevant laws to resolve the dispute.
Another significant difference in focus is that the substantive arbitrator is responsible for determining the outcome of the case based on its merits, which requires an in-depth engagement with the factual and legal arguments presented by both parties. By contrast, the process arbitrator focuses exclusively on streamlining the arbitration process to ensure it moves forward without unnecessary delays. They are often more adept at managing logistical issues, handling discovery disputes (including those related to electronically stored information), and dealing with procedural motions. This division of labor allows each arbitrator to specialize in their respective roles, enhancing the overall effectiveness, and efficiency of the arbitration process.
Another critical benefit of utilizing a process arbitrator is that they help the substantive arbitrator maintain neutrality throughout the arbitration. Because the process arbitrator handles preliminary disputes, such as discovery disagreements or procedural objections, the substantive arbitrator remains insulated from these contentious interactions. This separation reduces the risk of the substantive arbitrator being influenced or biased by early squabbles between the parties. The substantive arbitrator can then approach the final hearing with a fresh perspective, untainted by any procedural frustrations or negative impressions that might arise during the pre-hearing phase. By removing the burden of procedural management, the process arbitrator helps preserve the impartiality and objectivity of the substantive arbitrator, ensuring a fair and unbiased resolution of the core issues in dispute.
—————
Responsibilities of a process arbitrator
A process arbitrator’s role is like that of a judicial magistrate in the court system. In many jurisdictions, magistrates assist judges by managing pre-trial motions, handling discovery disputes, and overseeing other procedural issues, which allows judges to focus on substantive legal questions. Similarly, the process arbitrator handles a variety of procedural matters in arbitration, including:
1. Pre-hearing conferences and scheduling: The process arbitrator is responsible for setting up preliminary conferences with the parties to establish deadlines for discovery, document production, and the submission of evidence. This ensures that all procedural matters are discussed upfront, allowing the arbitration to progress smoothly.
2. Discovery disputes: Complex arbitrations often involve significant discovery, including the exchange of documents, depositions, and expert reports. The process arbitrator resolves disputes about the scope of discovery, helping to avoid lengthy delays that can arise when parties disagree on what information should be disclosed and when.
3. Electronically stored information: Managing electronically stored information (ESI) requests during discovery can become a time-consuming and contentious issue. The volume of ESI in modern disputes is vast, often including emails, databases, digital communications, and other electronically maintained documents. A process arbitrator can play a critical role in overseeing ESI requests, ensuring that discovery is efficient, relevant, and not overly burdensome. By narrowing the scope of ESI requests, resolving disputes over the format and methods of production, and setting clear deadlines, the process arbitrator prevents discovery from stalling the arbitration. Additionally, the process arbitrator can manage technical issues, such as metadata requests or e-discovery tools, allowing for a streamlined process that prevents one party from using ESI as a tactic for delay or overwhelming the other side with unnecessary information. This focused management not only accelerates the discovery process but also helps reduce costs related to extensive data processing and review.
4. Motions: A process arbitrator handles all non-dispositive motions, such as motions to compel discovery or procedural objections. By taking responsibility for these procedural motions, the process arbitrator prevents these issues from slowing down the main arbitrator’s decision-making process. This segmentation of arbitral roles also allows the substantive arbitrator to take on the case “fresh: without any previous history or bias from disputing parties.
5. Evidentiary management: In cases where there is a large volume of evidence, the process arbitrator can assist in determining what evidence is necessary, whether evidence can be shared electronically, and how it will be presented at hearings.
By separating procedural and substantive roles, a process arbitrator helps to keep the arbitration on track, minimizes delays, and ensures that procedural disputes do not become a distraction from the core issues in the case.
—————
Benefits of using a process arbitrator
The inclusion of a process arbitrator in complex arbitration proceedings offers several benefits, particularly in terms of efficiency and collaboration. Key advantages include:
1. Efficiency: The primary role of a process arbitrator is to streamline the arbitration process, ensuring that all procedural matters are handled efficiently and in a timely manner. By focusing solely on procedural issues, the process arbitrator helps to avoid delays caused by prolonged discovery disputes or procedural motions.
2. Cost-effectiveness: By managing procedural matters more effectively, a process arbitrator can help reduce the overall cost of arbitration. Unresolved procedural disputes can lead to lengthy delays, which drive up costs. The process arbitrator ensures that these disputes are resolved quickly and without the need for additional hearings or extensions.
3. Neutrality and impartiality: Since the process arbitrator deals only with procedural issues, their role is neutral and does not affect the substantive elements of the arbitration. This division of responsibilities ensures that the substantive arbitrator’s neutrality is preserved while still allowing for efficient procedural management.
4. Focus on collaboration: A process arbitrator can foster collaboration between the parties by encouraging open communication and transparency in the arbitration process. By facilitating pre-hearing conferences, the process arbitrator ensures that both sides are aware of deadlines, procedural requirements, and evidentiary expectations, which can reduce the likelihood of disputes later.
5. Specialized expertise: process arbitrators often bring specialized knowledge of procedural rules and best practices in arbitration. Their expertise allows them to resolve complex procedural issues quickly and effectively, without requiring the main arbitrator to spend time learning the intricacies of procedural law.
—————
Arbitration associations using process arbitrators
Several prominent arbitration institutions have begun embracing the role of the process arbitrator to enhance procedural efficiency in complex disputes, including the American Arbitration Association (AAA), JAMS (Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services), and the College of Commercial arbitrators (CCA). These organizations have all recognized the benefits of having a separate arbitrator to manage procedural matters, particularly in large-scale or multi-party disputes. The AAA rules have integrated procedural management techniques, offering parties the flexibility to appoint a process arbitrator to handle preliminary matters such as electronically stored information (ESI) requests and discovery disputes. JAMS often recommends the use of a specialized arbitrator to handle discovery and pre-hearing issues in complex commercial cases, and the CCA, known for its expertise in commercial arbitration, similarly encourages the use of procedural arbitrators to streamline case management and reduce costs, especially in disputes with extensive procedural complexity. These institutions recognize that separating procedural from substantive duties not only improves efficiency but also maintains the neutrality and fairness of the arbitration process.
The integration of a process arbitrator in complex arbitration proceedings substantially enhances procedural efficiency, fosters collaboration, and reduces overall costs. By exclusively addressing procedural disputes, the process arbitrator relieves the substantive arbitrator from delving into routine procedural nuances, thereby maintaining their impartiality and expediting the arbitration process. This role is instrumental in managing evidentiary logistics, and resolving non-dispositive motions, ensuring that procedural disputes do not obstruct the substantive adjudication of the case. The process arbitrator’s specialized expertise and neutrality can greatly contribute to a more streamlined and effective arbitration process.
—————
Lisa W. Timmons is the chair of the ADR Section of the State Bar of Michigan and serves as an arbitrator, mediator, and fact-finder of labor, employment, commercial, and consumer cases with AAA, FMCS,USPS, and MERC. Timmons is a member of Professional Resolution Experts of Michigan (PREMi) and was selected as a 2024-26 Associate with the College of Commercial arbitrators (CCA). Timmons earned her BA from Michigan State University, her MA in Dispute Resolution from Wayne State University, and her JD from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law.
Arbitration, traditionally viewed as a streamlined alternative to court, is widely used in commercial, construction, and international disputes. Its appeal lies in its perceived efficiency, confidentiality, and potential cost savings. However, as arbitration has become the preferred method for resolving complex disputes involving multiple parties, such as mass arbitration and complex commercial matters, the process has in many cases become as cumbersome and expensive as litigation. Long discovery phases, voluminous motion practice, and delays in scheduling hearings are some of the key issues. To address these challenges, the role of a process arbitrator has emerged, offering a promising solution to manage arbitration proceedings more effectively.
In essence, the process arbitrator ensures that procedural disputes—whether regarding discovery, scheduling, or other pre-hearing motions—are handled efficiently and fairly. This structure prevents procedural disputes from bogging down the substantive elements of the case and enables a more collaborative arbitration process.
The skill set of a process arbitrator is distinctly different from that of a substantive arbitrator. While a substantive arbitrator is typically an expert in the subject matter of the dispute, the process arbitrator is an expert in procedural efficiency and dispute management. The process arbitrator must have a deep knowledge of arbitration rules, discovery processes, and case management techniques. Their role is to ensure that the procedural elements, such as scheduling, discovery, and pre-hearing motions, are handled efficiently. This requires strong organizational and communication skills, as well as the ability to resolve procedural disputes quickly and fairly without delving into the merits of the case. On the other hand, the substantive arbitrator must focus on understanding the intricate details of the case, analyzing evidence, and applying the relevant laws to resolve the dispute.
Another significant difference in focus is that the substantive arbitrator is responsible for determining the outcome of the case based on its merits, which requires an in-depth engagement with the factual and legal arguments presented by both parties. By contrast, the process arbitrator focuses exclusively on streamlining the arbitration process to ensure it moves forward without unnecessary delays. They are often more adept at managing logistical issues, handling discovery disputes (including those related to electronically stored information), and dealing with procedural motions. This division of labor allows each arbitrator to specialize in their respective roles, enhancing the overall effectiveness, and efficiency of the arbitration process.
Another critical benefit of utilizing a process arbitrator is that they help the substantive arbitrator maintain neutrality throughout the arbitration. Because the process arbitrator handles preliminary disputes, such as discovery disagreements or procedural objections, the substantive arbitrator remains insulated from these contentious interactions. This separation reduces the risk of the substantive arbitrator being influenced or biased by early squabbles between the parties. The substantive arbitrator can then approach the final hearing with a fresh perspective, untainted by any procedural frustrations or negative impressions that might arise during the pre-hearing phase. By removing the burden of procedural management, the process arbitrator helps preserve the impartiality and objectivity of the substantive arbitrator, ensuring a fair and unbiased resolution of the core issues in dispute.
—————
Responsibilities of a process arbitrator
A process arbitrator’s role is like that of a judicial magistrate in the court system. In many jurisdictions, magistrates assist judges by managing pre-trial motions, handling discovery disputes, and overseeing other procedural issues, which allows judges to focus on substantive legal questions. Similarly, the process arbitrator handles a variety of procedural matters in arbitration, including:
1. Pre-hearing conferences and scheduling: The process arbitrator is responsible for setting up preliminary conferences with the parties to establish deadlines for discovery, document production, and the submission of evidence. This ensures that all procedural matters are discussed upfront, allowing the arbitration to progress smoothly.
2. Discovery disputes: Complex arbitrations often involve significant discovery, including the exchange of documents, depositions, and expert reports. The process arbitrator resolves disputes about the scope of discovery, helping to avoid lengthy delays that can arise when parties disagree on what information should be disclosed and when.
3. Electronically stored information: Managing electronically stored information (ESI) requests during discovery can become a time-consuming and contentious issue. The volume of ESI in modern disputes is vast, often including emails, databases, digital communications, and other electronically maintained documents. A process arbitrator can play a critical role in overseeing ESI requests, ensuring that discovery is efficient, relevant, and not overly burdensome. By narrowing the scope of ESI requests, resolving disputes over the format and methods of production, and setting clear deadlines, the process arbitrator prevents discovery from stalling the arbitration. Additionally, the process arbitrator can manage technical issues, such as metadata requests or e-discovery tools, allowing for a streamlined process that prevents one party from using ESI as a tactic for delay or overwhelming the other side with unnecessary information. This focused management not only accelerates the discovery process but also helps reduce costs related to extensive data processing and review.
4. Motions: A process arbitrator handles all non-dispositive motions, such as motions to compel discovery or procedural objections. By taking responsibility for these procedural motions, the process arbitrator prevents these issues from slowing down the main arbitrator’s decision-making process. This segmentation of arbitral roles also allows the substantive arbitrator to take on the case “fresh: without any previous history or bias from disputing parties.
5. Evidentiary management: In cases where there is a large volume of evidence, the process arbitrator can assist in determining what evidence is necessary, whether evidence can be shared electronically, and how it will be presented at hearings.
By separating procedural and substantive roles, a process arbitrator helps to keep the arbitration on track, minimizes delays, and ensures that procedural disputes do not become a distraction from the core issues in the case.
—————
Benefits of using a process arbitrator
The inclusion of a process arbitrator in complex arbitration proceedings offers several benefits, particularly in terms of efficiency and collaboration. Key advantages include:
1. Efficiency: The primary role of a process arbitrator is to streamline the arbitration process, ensuring that all procedural matters are handled efficiently and in a timely manner. By focusing solely on procedural issues, the process arbitrator helps to avoid delays caused by prolonged discovery disputes or procedural motions.
2. Cost-effectiveness: By managing procedural matters more effectively, a process arbitrator can help reduce the overall cost of arbitration. Unresolved procedural disputes can lead to lengthy delays, which drive up costs. The process arbitrator ensures that these disputes are resolved quickly and without the need for additional hearings or extensions.
3. Neutrality and impartiality: Since the process arbitrator deals only with procedural issues, their role is neutral and does not affect the substantive elements of the arbitration. This division of responsibilities ensures that the substantive arbitrator’s neutrality is preserved while still allowing for efficient procedural management.
4. Focus on collaboration: A process arbitrator can foster collaboration between the parties by encouraging open communication and transparency in the arbitration process. By facilitating pre-hearing conferences, the process arbitrator ensures that both sides are aware of deadlines, procedural requirements, and evidentiary expectations, which can reduce the likelihood of disputes later.
5. Specialized expertise: process arbitrators often bring specialized knowledge of procedural rules and best practices in arbitration. Their expertise allows them to resolve complex procedural issues quickly and effectively, without requiring the main arbitrator to spend time learning the intricacies of procedural law.
—————
Arbitration associations using process arbitrators
Several prominent arbitration institutions have begun embracing the role of the process arbitrator to enhance procedural efficiency in complex disputes, including the American Arbitration Association (AAA), JAMS (Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services), and the College of Commercial arbitrators (CCA). These organizations have all recognized the benefits of having a separate arbitrator to manage procedural matters, particularly in large-scale or multi-party disputes. The AAA rules have integrated procedural management techniques, offering parties the flexibility to appoint a process arbitrator to handle preliminary matters such as electronically stored information (ESI) requests and discovery disputes. JAMS often recommends the use of a specialized arbitrator to handle discovery and pre-hearing issues in complex commercial cases, and the CCA, known for its expertise in commercial arbitration, similarly encourages the use of procedural arbitrators to streamline case management and reduce costs, especially in disputes with extensive procedural complexity. These institutions recognize that separating procedural from substantive duties not only improves efficiency but also maintains the neutrality and fairness of the arbitration process.
The integration of a process arbitrator in complex arbitration proceedings substantially enhances procedural efficiency, fosters collaboration, and reduces overall costs. By exclusively addressing procedural disputes, the process arbitrator relieves the substantive arbitrator from delving into routine procedural nuances, thereby maintaining their impartiality and expediting the arbitration process. This role is instrumental in managing evidentiary logistics, and resolving non-dispositive motions, ensuring that procedural disputes do not obstruct the substantive adjudication of the case. The process arbitrator’s specialized expertise and neutrality can greatly contribute to a more streamlined and effective arbitration process.
—————
Lisa W. Timmons is the chair of the ADR Section of the State Bar of Michigan and serves as an arbitrator, mediator, and fact-finder of labor, employment, commercial, and consumer cases with AAA, FMCS,USPS, and MERC. Timmons is a member of Professional Resolution Experts of Michigan (PREMi) and was selected as a 2024-26 Associate with the College of Commercial arbitrators (CCA). Timmons earned her BA from Michigan State University, her MA in Dispute Resolution from Wayne State University, and her JD from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
http://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
