Menu
Arbitrations
Felicia is an experienced arbitrator who serves on the American Arbitration Association’s National Roster of Arbitrators for Commercial, Energy, and Consumer disputes, is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (FCIArb), and also serves by agreement of the parties in independently-administered (ad hoc) arbitrations.
Felicia has served as an arbitrator in a range of disputes involving contract, business separation, financial services, construction, healthcare, warranty, fiduciary duty, asset and real estate valuation, trustee-beneficiary, and consumer claims.
Felicia has experience serving as a sole arbitrator and as a panelist. In addition to serving as an arbitrator in proceedings administered through the AAA, Felicia is also an arbitrator panelist for the Texas Justice Center (Houston), and serves on the Texas Comptroller’s Arbitration Registry for Property Tax Appraisal Appeals.
Scheduling: Parties may jointly and privately arrange to have Felicia serve as an arbitrator or they may contact the American Arbitration Association or Texas Justice Center to request Felicia to serve as an arbitrator in an administered proceeding.
Arbitration is a private, voluntary method of dispute resolution in which the parties agree to have their dispute presented to a single or panel of neutral arbitrators, instead of a judge.
While arbitration is often referred to as an “alternative” form of dispute resolution, in some respects, the process resembles traditional courtroom litigation. For example, in an arbitration, the parties are represented by counsel, and witnesses and evidence are introduced in a final hearing in front of one or more neutral arbitrators who will decide the outcome of the dispute. The arbitrator’s decision is usually provided in the form of a written award.
Some reasons parties prefer arbitration over traditional litigation
Privacy
The parties do not file pleadings, motions, or other documents with a governmental entity, and the hearings are not conducted in a public forum. In this way, arbitration provides parties a forum for dispute resolution outside of the public’s view, with a private arbitrator selected through an agreed-upon process.
Neutral with Experience
At the courthouse, a judge randomly assigned to a case may have very little, if any, experience with the issues, industry, or subject of the dispute. Through an agreement to arbitrate, the parties may agree to submit their dispute to one or several arbitrators (a panel), and require the arbitrator(s) be qualified by factors of the parties’ choosing, such as by profession, experience, geographic region, etc.
Control
The parties can, by agreement, determine how the proceeding will be conducted. Sometimes the parties adopt the procedures of a forum (like the American Arbitration Association), but they may agree to their own procedural rules. A procedural agreement might address whether to engage in discovery and, if so, how much and what kind, the timing of the arbitration, where the arbitration will be conducted, the number of arbitrators, and how the arbitrators will be selected. In this way, the parties have the opportunity to control the process and cost of the proceeding.
Convenience
Arbitrators typically make scheduling decisions only after first conferring with the parties’ counsel regarding mutually agreeable dates, which helps to minimize schedule disruptions.
Privacy, control, and efficiency are three reasons
parties prefer resolving disputes through arbitration instead of asking strangers in back-logged, public court systems to determine their futures.