Practice question
A party files a timely, proper reconsideration motion with proof of service, identifying palpable errors in the arbitrator’s award. The opponent insists that the pending motion has no effect because the guidelines historically prohibited reconsideration. Which is best under DO255?
- The historical prohibition remains controlling despite the revised text
- Current RuleVI permits the specified motion and provides that its timely proper pendency stays execution of the ruling sought to be reconsidered
- Every motion, however late, stays execution forever
- Only a second motion can affect execution
- The arbitrator may never correct a patent error
Legal references
- DO255-2025, RuleVI Sections6–7: https://www.scribd.com/document/1056241538/DO-255-25-Revised-Procedural-Guidelines-in-the-Conduct-of-Voluntary-Arbitration-Proceedings
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.