Are Umpires in an Insurance coverage Appraisal Immune from Being Sued?

This submit is a follow-up to “Does an Umpire Have Immunity From Go well with? Is an Appraisal an Arbitration in North Carolina?” The events have filed appellate briefs on the matter and are awaiting a choice.¹

Arguments for arbitral immunity made by the Umpire, O’Leary, are:

1. The North Carolina Arbitration Act gives that arbitrators have the identical immunity as judges, and this immunity “dietary supplements any immunity underneath different regulation.”
2. The “different regulation” contains North Carolina frequent regulation on the immunity of personal residents resolving disputes.
3. Below the “performance check,” non-public residents reminiscent of O’Leary performing as arbitrators have judicial immunity when resolving disputes between events or adjudicating non-public rights.
4. O’Leary was a personal citizen performing the perform of resolving the dispute between the insurer and insured in accordance with the coverage’s appraisal course of, so he ought to get immunity underneath the performance check.
5. Denying O’Leary immunity would deter non-public residents from serving as umpires/arbitrators and intrude with the conduct of those proceedings.

Arguments towards arbitral immunity made by First Protecting embrace the next:

1. The Arbitration Act solely applies to “arbitrators” and “arbitration agreements.” O’Leary was an “umpire” underneath an appraisal provision, not an arbitration settlement.
2. The district court docket appropriately discovered the Arbitration Act inapplicable to an umpire in an appraisal. O’Leary deserted this argument on enchantment.
3. The “performance check” from North Carolina frequent regulation doesn’t apply to develop arbitral immunity to umpires. The case cited by O’Leary predated the Arbitration Act and concerned an precise arbitration settlement relatively than an insurance coverage appraisal.
4. O’Leary waived the “performance check” argument by not correctly elevating it within the district court docket.
5. Public coverage doesn’t justify extending arbitral immunity to umpires in insurance coverage value determinations past the phrases of the coverage.

The important thing dispute is whether or not the Arbitration Act’s immunity applies solely to formal arbitrators or if it extends to umpires in value determinations underneath the frequent regulation “performance check.” O’Leary argues for a broad studying, whereas First Protecting argues for limiting immunity to what the statute expressly covers. Because the case is so depending on North Carolina regulation, I’m not sure how a lot the choice will influence this challenge in different states.

One lesson from this case is that every one appraisers and umpires ought to carry insurance coverage to assist defray the numerous authorized prices if one social gathering recordsdata swimsuit.

Thought For The Day 

Judges, like folks, could also be divided roughly into 4 courses: judges with neither head nor coronary heart—they’re to be averted in any respect prices; judges with head however no coronary heart—they’re nearly as unhealthy; then judges with coronary heart however no head—dangerous however higher than the primary two; and at last, these uncommon judges who possess each head and a coronary heart—due to blind luck, that’s our decide. 
—Robert Traver

¹ First Protecting Ins. Co. v. O’Leary, Case No. 23-2160 (4th Cir.).