EDWIN HOYLE SNUGGS, and
PHYLLIS C. SNUGGS,
Plaintiffs,
v
.
Gaston County
No. 02 CVS 2875
ALLEN WAYNE POSTON, and
SUSAN R. POSTON,
Defendants.
Stott, Hollowell, Palmer & Windham, L.L.P., by James C.
Windham, Jr. and Matthew R. Arnold, for plaintiff-appellees.
Garlitz & Williamson, PLLC, by Thomas D. Garlitz, for
defendant-appellants.
STEELMAN, Judge.
Plaintiffs sued defendants on a $400,000 note that was
executed on 30
June 1999. On 8
July 2003, the Superior Court
entered an order directing the parties to participate in
court-ordered arbitration pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-37.1,
and sent notice to the parties that the arbitration hearing would
be held on 19
September 2003. Defendants failed to appear at the
19
September 2003
hearing. After considering plaintiff's evidence,
the arbitrator entered an award in the amount of $679,167.58 in
favor of the plaintiffs. On 16
October 2003, the defendants filed a request for trial
de novo. On 9
January 2004, plaintiffs filed a motion for
sanctions under North Carolina Rules of Court-Ordered Arbitration
Rule 3(l). Judge Evans heard the motion on 20
January 2004. On 22
January 2004, the trial court entered judgment finding that the
imposition of sanctions was appropriate and imposed sanctions
striking the defendants request for trial de novo and entering
judgment in favor of plaintiffs.
From this judgment defendants
appeal.
The dispositive issue is whether the trial court had
jurisdiction to order arbitration in this case. [J]urisdiction
over the subject matter of a proceeding cannot be conferred by
consent, waiver, or estoppel. In re Davis, 114 N.C. App. 253, 256,
441 S.E.2d 696, 698 (1994)(citations omitted). Issues of
jurisdiction may be raised at any time, including by this Court,
sua sponte, on appeal. Hayes v. Turner, 98 N.C. App. 451, 454, 391
S.E.2d 513, 515 (1990).
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-37.1 (2003), titled: Statewide
court-ordered, nonbinding arbitration in certain civil actions,
provides in section (c): This procedure [court-ordered
arbitration] may be employed in civil actions where claims do not
exceed fifteen thousand dollars ($ 15,000) . . .. N.C. Gen. Stat.
§ 7A-37.1(b) states: The Supreme Court of North Carolina may adopt
rules governing this procedure and may supervise its implementation
and operation through the Administrative Office of the Courts.
Pursuant to the authority given it by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-37.1,the Supreme Court adopted Rules for Court-Ordered Arbitration in
North Carolina (the Rules), which became effective 1 January 1987.
Rule 1, which determines which actions are subject to court-ordered
arbitration, was amended most recently on 19 December 2002. This
amendment became effective 1 January 2003.
We note that it is clear from the record that both parties and
the trial court assumed that the applicable Rules were those prior
to the 19 December 2002 amendment. This assumption was incorrect.
The relevant amendment of Rule 1 was effective beginning 1 January
2003. The Superior Court's order compelling civil arbitration was
filed 9 July 2003, and the arbitration hearing was conducted on 19
September 2003. The 1 January 2003 amended version of Rule 1
controls in the instant case.
Rule 1 clearly states that Superior Court actions subject to
court-ordered arbitration are those where the amount in controversy
does not exceed $15,000.00:
Actions subject to arbitration.
(a) By order of the court.
(2) Superior Court.
The Senior Resident Superior Court Judge may
order any civil Superior Court action to
arbitration, where the amount in controversy
does not exceed $ 15,000, under these rules
after the Court confers with the parties at a
scheduling conference. The judge shall enter a
written order, which finds that the action is
appropriate for arbitration and that the
amount in controversy does not exceed $15,000.
(b) Arbitration by agreement.
(2) Superior Court.
The parties in any civil action pending in the
Superior Court Division where the amount in
controversy does not exceed $ 15,000 may, upon
joint written motion, request to submit the
action to arbitration under these rules. The
Court may approve the motion if it finds that
arbitration under these rules is appropriate,
and the amount in controversy does not exceed
$ 15,000. The consent of the parties shall not
be presumed, but shall be stated by the
parties expressly in writing.
N.C. Court-Ordered Arb. Rule 1 (2004).
In this case, the complaint, on its face discloses an amount
in controversy of over $400,000.00, well in excess of the
$15,000.00 limit. In ordering this matter to arbitration, the
Superior Court made no finding that the amount in controversy did
not exceed $15,000.00. The Superior Court was without authority to
order this case into arbitration pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-
37.1(c) and Rule 1 of the North Carolina Rules for Court-Ordered
Arbitration. It was thus inappropriate for the trial court to
impose sanctions for the defendants' failure to attend the
arbitration hearing. We vacate the judgment of the trial court and
remand this matter for further proceedings.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUDSON concur.
Report per Rule 30(e).
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***