|
Cipoletti Case Not Yet Closed
 | By David L. Ganz, Numismatic News
September 09, 2009 |
Just when it seemed like it was over with an arbitrator's award, ousted American Numismatic Associaton executive director Christopher Cipoletti filed a motion in Colorado Springs, Colo., court seeking to overturn the arbitration award on the grounds that the arbitrator exceeded her authority. It is one of the few bases that, if correct, constitutes grounds to throw out the July decision made public recently.
In a related development, a routine request to postpone the December trial date of the former ANA trial counsel was given a decidedly non-routine denial; the court suggested that the parties prepare for trial and mediation. The combined events make for a renewed vitality to what seemed to be a closed case.
The arbitrator, a private Colorado attorney Kathryn E. Miller, acting through the American Arbitration Association, decided on May 27 that Cipoletti "breached his fiduciary duties to the ANA. I found therefore that the claimant was terminated for cause and is entitled to no further payments under his employment agreement. I dismissed the claimant's case in its entirety at that time."
A subsequent determination was made that Cipoletti owed the ANA over $50,000 in filing fees and arbitrator's costs. Cipoletti was the ANA's outside general counsel and became executive director on the retirement of Edward C. Rochette in 2003.
In technical terms, Cipoletti applied "to the court for an order vacating the arbitration award". His attorney stated that "The arbitrator ignored the terms of the employment agreement between the ANA and Cipoletti by ... denying Cipoletti's claim for compensation based on reasons that were not set forth in the termination letter."
Specifically, they claim, "Although the ANA did provide a letter to Cipoletti purporting to support the termination of his employment (the "termination letter"), the arbitrator's dismissal order was based on allegations that surfaced during the discovery phase of the arbitration and were not contained in the termination letter."
Their conclusion: "Therefore, the dismissal order should be vacated," citing a Denver county case where the court made precedent: "If an arbitrator exceeds his authority by going beyond the contract terms and, in effect, enacting new binding terms and conditions of employment, the dissatisfied party may apply to the court to vacate the award."
Cipoletti requested that the court vacate the dismissal order and the final award and noted that his lawyers would soon "be filing a detailed brief setting forth the evidence in support of this application."
Meanwhile, Judge David A. Gilbert ruled Aug. 28 that, "The court has reviewed the filed joint response" requesting adjournment. "The court is unlikely to be able to reset the trial in close proximity to the existing trial date. The court urges the parties to complete discovery, prepare for trial and cooperate in good faith in an attempt to settle the matter through ADR (alternative dispute resolution."
Add to: del.icio.us digg
With this article: Email to friend Print
Something to add? Notice an error? Comment on this article. | |