Coverage note: this corpus holds the
consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check
palegis.us.
§ 7362. Voluntary arbitration of pending judicial matters.
(a) General rule.--A civil matter or issue therein may be referred by consent of the parties to one or
more appointive judicial officers or other persons for hearing or hearing and disposition.
(b) Government units.--Any government unit of this Commonwealth, with the consent of the solicitor or other
official counsel of the unit, may agree to the reference of a civil matter pursuant
to this section.
(c) Procedure.--The appointive judicial officers or other persons appointed or designated pursuant
to this section shall have such powers and shall proceed in such manner as shall be
prescribed by general rules.
(d) Appeal.--Any party to a matter referred under this section shall have such rights of appeal,
if any, as shall be prescribed by general rules. Where no right to appeal is prescribed
by general rule, all parties shall be deemed to have waived any right to appeal which
they might otherwise enjoy under the Constitution of Pennsylvania or otherwise in
mutual consideration of an expeditious final disposition of the matter, but no such
waiver shall apply if it is clearly shown that a party was denied a hearing or that
fraud, misconduct, corruption or other irregularity caused the rendition of an unjust,
inequitable or unconscionable award.
Notes of Decisions
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Dill, 108 A.3d 882 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 4× “42 Pa.C.S. § 7362(d). Also relevant to our discussion is Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1302, which addresses the appointment of the board of arbitrators in actions submitted to compulsory arbitration.”
Fastuca v. L.W. Molnar & Assocs., 950 A.2d 980 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2008).
“§ 7361, and of voluntary arbitration of matters “referred by consent of the parties to one or more appointive judicial officers or other persons for hearing or hearing and disposition,” see 42 Pa.C.S. § 7362. Judicial arbitration occurs as a matter of law when the parties’…”
Jefferson Woodlands Partners, L.P. v. Jefferson Hills Borough, 881 A.2d 44 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005).
“This matter could possibly be considered under Section 7362, 42 Pa.C.S. § 7362, which applies when "[a] civil matter or issue therein [is] referred by consent of the parties to one or more appointive judicial officers or other persons for hearing or hearing and disposition.”
State Farm Mut. Auto v. Dill, B., No. 3120 EDA 2012 (Pa. Super. Ct. Jan. 13, 2015).
“§ 7301-7320 3 We note that, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 7362(d), waiver of a defect in the arbitration process may be excused in the event that “fraud, misconduct, corruption or other irregularity caused the rendition of an unjust, inequitable or unconscionable award.”
State Farm Mut. Auto v. Dill, B., No. 3120 EDA 2012 (Pa. Super. Ct. Jan. 13, 2015).
“5 The Majority examined Attorney McNulty’s failure to remove himself to determine whether it was an irregularity that would excuse Ms.”
Silberman, M. v. Loguidice v. M.D., No. 921 EDA 2014 (Pa. Super. Ct. Feb. 13, 2015).
“Attorney Ferhat's subjectIve feeling wIth respect to the Importance of the addItional terms he wished to include In the parties' agreement, and his regret of his oversight In neglecting to discuss them in conference on November 18, 2013 notwithstanding, the absence of those…”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 7362(d): 3 cases
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Dill, 108 A.3d 882 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 7362(d). Also relevant to our discussion is Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1302, which addresses the appointment of the board of arbitrators in actions submitted to compulsory arbitration.”
State Farm Mut. Auto v. Dill, B., No. 3120 EDA 2012 (Pa. Super. Ct. Jan. 13, 2015).
“§ 7301-7320 3 We note that, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 7362(d), waiver of a defect in the arbitration process may be excused in the event that “fraud, misconduct, corruption or other irregularity caused the rendition of an unjust, inequitable or unconscionable award.”
State Farm Mut. Auto v. Dill, B., No. 3120 EDA 2012 (Pa. Super. Ct. Jan. 13, 2015).
“5 The Majority examined Attorney McNulty’s failure to remove himself to determine whether it was an irregularity that would excuse Ms.”
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.