O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-9-17 (2019)

Arbitrators’ fees and expenses

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Unless otherwise provided in the agreement to arbitrate, the arbitrators’ expenses and fees, together with other expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be paid as provided in the award.

History

Code 1933, § 7-318, enacted by Ga. L. 1978, p. 2270, § 1; Code 1981, § 9-9-97;

Code 1981, § 9-9-17, as redesignated by Ga. L. 1988, p. 903, § 1.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Attorney’s fees. - O.C.G.A. § 9-9-17 does not specifically prohibit the parties from contracting for the recovery of attorney’s fees in arbitration proceedings; it merely addresses the allocation of the expenses of arbitration other than attorney’s fees and provides that, as to the allocation of those expenses, the award will control insofar as it is not inconsistent with the parties’ agreement. Hope & Assocs. v. Marvin M. Black Co., 205 Ga. App. 561, 422 S.E.2d 918, 1992 Ga. App. LEXIS 1252 (1992). Vacation of award not warranted. - The appellate record did not reveal a manifest disregard for the law nor com-

plete irrationality by the arbitrator sufficient to warrant vacation of the award. Haddon v. Shaheen & Co., 231 Ga. App. 596, 499 S.E.2d 693. Federal Arbitration Act preempts this section. - Once it is found that an underlying contract involves interstate or foreign commerce or a maritime transaction, the federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., preempts the field and former O.C.G.A. § 9-9-97 (now this section) does not apply. Ceco Concrete Constr. v. J.T. Schrimsher Constr. Co., 792 F. Supp. 109, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7941 (N.D. Ga. 1992).

RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. Awarding attorneys’ fees in connection with arbitration, 60 A.L.R.5th 669.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1990–1998 · leading case: Hope & Assocs., Inc. v. Marvin M. Black Co., 422 S.E.2d 918 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hope & Assocs., Inc. v. Marvin M. Black Co., 422 S.E.2d 918 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 16× “" OCGA § 9-9-17 (formerly codified as OCGA § 9-9-97 (a)).”

Haddon v. Shaheen & Co., 499 S.E.2d 693 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “561, 562 (1) ( 422 SE2d 918 ), where overstepping was found because the arbitrator awarded attorney fees contrary to the statutory provisions of OCGA § 9-9-17. We need not here decide whether Greene, supra, has precluded this Court from vacating arbitration awards by applying…”

Walton Acoustics, Inc. v. Currahee Constr. Co., 399 S.E.2d 265 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “Although this broader authority was eliminated in 1988, see OCGA § 9-9-17, it was extant in this case.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.