Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

sponsored by
News


City, county boxed in by law

Arbitration mandate has become expensive




When construction delays and cost overruns beset the Regional Justice Center in downtown Las Vegas, Clark County and the general contractor went to arbitration, an alternative to suing in court that's mandated by a state statute dating back more than three decades.

Five years have passed and the case involving the justice center still isn't resolved. Final arguments are scheduled next month, with a decision expected before the end of the year.


Most Popular Stories
  • Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer
  • Three suspects arrested in shooting death of police officer
  • FATAL SHOOTING: Police again mourn comrade
  • NORM: Biden finds rank has its privileges
  • Corrections officer dies in collision on U.S. 95
  • Two suspects in officer's slaying could face death penalty
  • Two of three suspects in slaying of officer could face death penalty
  • NORM: Walton: Coach deserved a punch
  • DEADLY HOME INVASION: Police suspect link to family
  • Station Casinos posts $455 million third-quarter loss
  • NORM: 'Girls Gone Wild' creator feels heat




  • Meanwhile, the county has spent close to $20 million on lawyers and arbitrators. It could be on the hook for substantially more if the case doesn't go the county's way -- the contractor and the insurance company are seeking $93 million in damages.

    The city of Las Vegas is in a comparable but less dramatic situation.

    Since 2005, the city and Asphalt Products Corp. have been in arbitration over the construction of tennis courts at the Stacy and Amanda Darling Tennis Center. The city has budgeted $2.3 million for legal costs, more than twice what was originally expected, in a dispute that focuses on cracks in tennis courts.

    Arbitration is not new, and it's widely touted as cheaper, faster and more final than a civil lawsuit.

    But even its backers say arbitration doesn't always work the way it should in Nevada, and the city of Las Vegas wants to change the law that mandates arbitration when disputes arise in public works contracts.

    "We should have the flexibility," said Ted Olivas, the city's director of government relations. Any entity that does public works -- local governments, school districts, and the state -- should have options, including lawsuits, to resolve disputes, he said.

    "It's no different from private industry," Olivas said. "Why would local government be required to do something that private industry is not?"

    Associated General Contractors was one group lobbying for the arbitration requirement in 1971. It hasn't taken a position on Las Vegas' proposal, said Steve Holloway, executive vice president of government relations with the AGC's Las Vegas chapter. But the group will probably bring something else to the table.

    Now, three arbitrators -- often former judges or people with industry-specific expertise -- hear public works cases, each charging hundreds of dollars an hour. If only one was required, it would reduce the cost of the proceedings, he said.

    "That's what we may counter with," Holloway said.

    Contractors historically have preferred arbitration to lawsuits.

    "It was less expensive," Holloway said. "It didn't require as much time. The discovery process wasn't as great."

    He complained, though, that administrative rules complicate the process unnecessarily.

    "It's become a much more involved and costly process," he said.

    Jean Sternlight, director of the Saltman Center for Conflict Resolution at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, agreed that three arbitrators makes it "three times as expensive, and also slower, because you have to work with three different people."

    "For all the bad things one can say about litigation ... at least the judge is free."

    It's also not very common to have an arbitration requirement written into state law, she said .

    "Arbitration is sometimes desirable and sometimes not desirable," she said.

    It also tends to be more private, since there aren't many filings in public courts.

    The reduced public access makes it controversial for governments to use arbitration, since public money is at stake. An arbitrator's decision is often also final, and appeals are tough even when they're available.

    "Arbitration decisions have much more finality and are harder to reverse," Sternlight said. "It's hard to get arbitration decisions vacated.

    "Sometimes parties want that."

    And sometimes they don't.

    "There's a lot of factors that work into whether you use arbitration or not," said Las Vegas city attorney Brad Jerbic. "We're not saying, 'Let's go to court every time.' We're saying, 'Let's have a choice.' "

    The APCO case is unusual, Jerbic said. Though disputes over public works projects are common, they usually don't make it to arbitration.

    Clark County would also welcome a change, said Welling.

    "We would prefer the legal right to take another approach, including going to court," she said. "That's pretty much all I can say given that this process has been going on."

    Holloway, though, wondered whether a handful of extreme examples were being used to justify a change in the law.

    "That's very often the case in the legislative process," he said. "It's kind of like the judicial system -- bad cases make bad law."

    Contact reporter Alan Choate at achoate@reviewjournal.com or 702-229-6435.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 6 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    ET wrote on September 02, 2008 09:22 PM: Please ,tell who the Lawyers are that made 20 million, in legal fees.Spread some light on this issue enlighten us.Are you feeling, Big Oil has taken over the courts
    in LV ?,greedy pigs.Who is this Asphalt co ,never give another contract to Asphalt Products or anyone involved, with stealing the tax papers $$$. this is outrageous.


    Mamamia wrote on September 02, 2008 08:40 PM: Of all the stupid, idiotic things our "elected" officials, including the civil servants, who deign to bestow us a glance, this one takes the cake! Not only did we taxpayers get stuck with a bum building, we have to spend more millions fighting the bum contractors, who are, no doubt, somebody's nephew or whatever, and will win in the end, thanks to our corrupt system. Thanks for taking us to the cleaners. Again!


    RonNV wrote on September 02, 2008 01:12 PM: I do not think that you have to be an attorney to be an arbitrator. I have done commercial arbitration and am a Certified Public Accountant. The training was done through American Arbitration Association. These are business and commercial matters largely and a competent CPA may be more beneficial than a lawyer in many instances.


    Justice Nevada Style wrote on September 02, 2008 08:08 AM: It is all about the money. Justice is far from Nevada. Juiced up attorneys can be mediators. Sometimes the outcome was predetermined behind your back. Yes, you got "set up" and you will pay the bill.

    Attorneys will suggest arbitration. However, they fail to tell you it can be more costly than going to court.

    The Nevada legal system is very flawed and most likely by design.

    The legal community prospers and the litigant ends up bankrupt.




    Paul wrote on September 02, 2008 07:53 AM: This is just the tip of the iceberg. Mandatory arbitration with public sector unions is what is truly killing local government as compensation expenses are being driven upwards and out of control.


    ths wrote on September 02, 2008 07:06 AM: It sounds like the only people becoming rich from arbitration are the three arbitrators.

    The lawyers would get paid if they were in front of arbitrators or judges.

    Good for the city to look out for the best of out tax dollars. Yes another thing to be tied up in court but often court cases won't linger on as when one goes to court they have their case built.