Menu
Log in
Forgot password

Association for Conflict Resolution - Greater New York Chapter↑

Search
Log in
Forgot password

Delay of Hearings and Sanctions

Monday, October 12, 2026 10:58 AM | Anonymous


Image result for delay

When a party repeatedly delays a hearing, should an arbitrator impose meaningful sanctions—even if doing so could effectively determine the outcome?

What are your thoughts? 

Comments

  • Monday, October 12, 2026 1:47 PM | Robert L. Arrington
    It would take a severe case for me to decide the outcome of a matter by sanction. I would have no difficulty in granting lesser sanctions, such as an interim award of attorneys' fees or costs.
    Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, October 12, 2026 1:58 PM | Mark Bunim
    I had such a situation where a party (the Claimant)repeteadly sought adjournments of the hearing. If both parties consent, it is difficult to deny the adjournment, however in our case the Respondent did not consent, so we set the hearing date as "final." When the Claimant again sought an adjournment, we denied it. Within one week thereafter, the case settled.
    Link  •  Reply
    • Monday, October 12, 2026 3:13 PM | Steven Skulnik
      👍
      Link  •  Reply
    • Tuesday, October 13, 2026 8:30 AM | Joe Catania
      I agree it's a closer question when the other party consents. However, I don't believe consent is an automatic pass and allows the adjournment in all cases. True, the parties have signed on contractually to this process which mitigates in favor of their charting their own course. However, I believe that part of the contractual commitment includes signing on to the process and that means giving up a certain degree of independence to the rules of the process and the discretion of the arbitrator. Speed, efficiency and therefore decreased costs, along with expertise and fairness are the hallmarks of the arbitral process and when one party unreasonably imposes on the good graces of the other to secure consent the first two considerations go out the door. I always suspected that when I have denied yet another request for an adjournment from a repeat offender the other consenting party secretly breathed a sigh of relief.
      Link  •  Reply
    • Tuesday, October 13, 2026 8:30 AM | Joe Catania
      I agree it's a closer question when the other party consents. However, I don't believe consent is an automatic pass and allows the adjournment in all cases. True, the parties have signed on contractually to this process which mitigates in favor of their charting their own course. However, I believe that part of the contractual commitment includes signing on to the process and that means giving up a certain degree of independence to the rules of the process and the discretion of the arbitrator. Speed, efficiency and therefore decreased costs, along with expertise and fairness are the hallmarks of the arbitral process and when one party unreasonably imposes on the good graces of the other to secure consent the first two considerations go out the door. I always suspected that when I have denied yet another request for an adjournment from a repeat offender the other consenting party secretly breathed a sigh of relief.
      Link  •  Reply
  • Monday, October 12, 2026 2:29 PM | Rebecca A. Bowman, Esq., P.E.
    Unless it's a hugely complex, multi-party case, I'll give one adjournment with modest documentation. Upon a second request from the same party, alleging illness, I demanded a letter on physician letterhead confirming the alleged diagnosis. Financial sanction was reimbursement of any documented costs from the second reschedule -- the other party didn't submit any.
    Link  •  
    Author
    Comment
     
Association for Conflict Resolution - Greater New York Chapter

© 2026 ACR-GNY

Contact Us

Email us at questions@acrgny.org

ACR-GNY's mission and programming are generously sponsored by:

ADR Notable: Dispute Resolution Management Made Easy
Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software