It always cracks me up at the start of a deposition when one of the lawyers says to me, or another lawyer, “Usual stipulations?” What on earth are they talking about? There is no such thing as “usual stipulations.” More accurately, there is no universal definition of the term. Some attorneys think that it means, “All objections are reserved until trial.” Others believe it means, “The witness is waiving the right to reading and signing the transcript.” Or, “One counsel’s objections apply equally to all other counsel.”
Regardless of this ambiguity, most attorneys agree to the usual stipulations without knowing what they mean, probably out of fear of embarrassment or inexperience. However, the better part of valor is to confirm with all attorneys present precisely what everyone is stipulating to at the start of the deposition.
While there are many parallels to this usual stipulation example in the law, one that jumps out at me, crying for clarification, is the form of the arbitration award. Parties to arbitration need to understand not only the applicable rules of arbitration but also what the terms referenced in those rules actually mean. The American Arbitration Association publishes many sets of arbitration rules, covering construction, consumer and commercial cases, to name a few. These rules are publicly available online for all to read. One area addressed in each of these rule sets is the form of award.
Arbitration awards
At the end of the arbitration, the arbitrator typically issues a written award. The rules typically refer to the forms of written award available to the parties, including the default form of award should the parties not agree otherwise. These forms include the standard award, reasoned award, and findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Generally speaking, the standard award is set forth in the arbitrator’s conclusion. For example, “I, the Arbitrator, award the Claimant $500 on his affirmative claims, and I award the Respondent $0 on his counterclaims.” The reasoned award is more detailed than the standard award, providing the parties with the basis or method the arbitrator used in calculating the award.
Finally, findings of fact and conclusions of law provide a highly detailed recitation of the facts as understood and believed by the arbitrator, as well as each of the legal determinations reached by the arbitrator.
The preparation and selection of an arbitral award are functions of time and cost. The standard award is the quickest and least expensive to prepare. Findings of fact and conclusions of law take the longest to prepare and are the most expensive. A reasoned award is in the middle of the pack — providing some analysis but not painstaking detail.
Since most arbitration awards are not subject to appeal, many parties opt for the standard award. Other parties want to know why the arbitrator ruled the way they did, so they are willing to pay a premium in time and expense for that information. Still others may have future legal proceedings in mind and need findings of fact and conclusions of law to support that effort.
Unfortunately, many parties to arbitration proceedings have no idea what is involved in these three types of awards. They — or their lawyers — often end up agreeing to a form of award without knowing precisely what they are agreeing to, much like the lawyers with usual stipulations.
Attempting to modify an award
In the recent case of Niram, Inc. v. Salvi Steel Fabricators, LLC, No. In A-2600-24, 2026 WL 771917 (N.J. App. Div. March 19, 2026), the parties agreed to resolve their construction contract dispute through arbitration, resulting in a standard award. Niram sought to confirm the award in the Superior Court of New Jersey. Dissatisfied with the result of the arbitration, Salvi sought to modify or vacate the award. The trial court found in favor of Niram, and Salvi appealed. Niram, Inc., 2026 WL 771917, at *2.
The parties’ construction subcontract required them to prosecute any disputes through arbitration before the American Arbitration Association. Instead of agreeing to a reasoned award, the parties agreed to accept a standard award. The arbitration lasted six days and included many exhibits and testifying witnesses. The parties did not agree to a transcript, so none was prepared. Niram, Inc., 2026 WL 771917, at *2.
The arbitrator ultimately issued an award that read as follows:
“1. [Niram] is awarded $435,369.00 (FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE DOLLARS) for back charges and costs to complete.
“2. The amount of the lien filed [against the Project] was not properly before the Arbitrator in this matter.
“3. [Salvi] is not entitled to any amount (ZERO DOLLARS) since the payments by and credits due to [Niram] exceed the subcontract amount...
“Neither party is awarded interest or attorney fees.
“The administrative fees of the American Arbitration Association[,] totaling $20,575.00, and the compensation and expenses of the arbitrator[,] totaling $17,737.46[,] shall be borne as incurred.
“The above sums are to be paid on or before [30] days from the date of this Award.
“This Award is in full settlement of all claims and counterclaims submitted to this Arbitration. All claims not expressly granted herein are hereby, denied.”
Niram, Inc., 2026 WL 771917, at *2.
Salvi sought to have the arbitrator modify the award, but the arbitrator declined. After the trial court proceeding to confirm the award, the judge found that the arbitrator’s award could not be modified without disturbing his findings, which were not apparent from the standard award itself, and noted “some of the issues ... are really a product of the fact that the parties had elected the short form decision. Perhaps had there been the longer form version … it may have clarified … how [the arbitrator] reached those numbers.” Niram, Inc., 2026 WL 771917, at *2.
The Appellate Division agreed with the trial court, noting the New Jersey Arbitration Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:23B-1 to -36, provides a very narrow corridor of appellate review for arbitration awards. “Basically, arbitration awards may be vacated only for fraud, corruption, or similar wrongdoing on the part of the arbitrators. [They] can be corrected or modified only for very specifically defined mistakes.” Niram, Inc., 2026 WL 771917, at *3 (citation omitted).
Salvi raised none of these issues as a basis for its appeal. Moreover, the Appellate Division “decline[d] to speculate as to the arbitrator’s rationale [for his Award] where the parties agreed to a ‘standard award’ in which the arbitrator did not need to explain his reasons.” Niram, Inc., 2026 WL 771917, at *4. As a result, the Appellate Division honored the parties’ agreement to have a standard award, and the court likewise upheld the trial court’s decision to sustain the underlying arbitral award.
Takeaways
The main lesson to be learned from the Niram case is to be careful when selecting the form of arbitration award. While it is possible to select the form of award in the underlying agreement to arbitrate, most parties indicate their preference for the form of award during the preliminary management hearing with the arbitrator at the start of the proceedings.
Before agreeing to anything, the parties must understand their choices and weigh the options — including the time and cost ramifications — very carefully. This is important because, absent a statutory violation under the relevant arbitration act, a court will likely uphold the parties’ agreed-upon selection of the form of award, regardless of their satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) with the award’s contents.
_800x800_webp.webp?t=1775667064)
