## Facts

- A nursing-home corporation leased premises from a landlord partnership.
- The parties later executed a written rent-modification agreement signed by the corporation and by a partner on behalf of the landlord partnership.
- Shlomo Mikel held a 6% interest in the landlord partnership and claimed the tenant’s shareholders owed him amounts reflecting his share of rent allegedly due to the partnership.
- The dispute was submitted to a rabbinical tribunal (Beth Din) for religious arbitration (*din torah*); the shareholder-respondents received notice and appeared.
- Respondents initially appeared with counsel, but at two later sessions the Beth Din refused to allow their attorney to be present.
- Respondents asserted the attorney was a key witness to lease negotiations and, because of his exclusion, could not testify, present documents, or question Mikel; Mikel did not have counsel.
- The Beth Din proceedings were informal and lacked court-like evidentiary structure.
- The Beth Din issued a written award directing respondents to pay Mikel $9,000 and to make ongoing monthly payments equal to 6% of $23,000, stated as Mikel’s share of rental amounts allegedly owed.

## Issues

1. Whether a Beth Din arbitration award should be vacated because the tribunal excluded respondents’ attorney from key sessions.
2. Whether the informality of the Beth Din process, including limited participation by counsel and nontechnical evidentiary handling, constituted arbitral “misconduct” or otherwise deprived respondents of a fair hearing under New York arbitration law.

## Decision

- The court granted the petition to confirm the arbitration award.
- The court denied respondents’ motion to vacate.
- The court held that, given the parties’ voluntary submission to a religious tribunal, the exclusion of counsel and procedural informality did not justify vacatur without proof of statutory grounds such as misconduct causing unfairness.

## Legal Principles

- Judicial review of arbitration awards is narrow; courts do not revisit the merits of the arbitrators’ determinations.
- Parties who voluntarily submit disputes to arbitration are generally bound by the arbitral forum’s procedural mode, including procedures that differ from judicial practice.
- Arbitrators may proceed without strict adherence to substantive law or formal rules of evidence; arbitral process is expected to be less formal than litigation.
- An award may be vacated only on limited statutory grounds (e.g., corruption, fraud, partiality, or misconduct so prejudicial that a party is denied a fair hearing).
- Limiting counsel’s participation in an agreed arbitral forum does not, by itself, establish misconduct or denial of a fair hearing.

## Conclusion

The court confirmed the Beth Din award, ruling that voluntary submission to religious arbitration bound the parties to the tribunal’s informal procedures and that the exclusion of counsel from some sessions did not warrant vacatur absent a showing of statutorily recognized unfairness.


In re Arbitration Between Mikel & Scharf, 432 N.Y.S.2d 602 (Sup. Ct. Kings Cnty. 1980)