A United States District Court docket for the District of Hawai‘i not too long ago issued an order that highlights a essential however typically ignored geographic proximity issue within the appointment of appraisal umpires. 1 Although each events proposed extremely certified retired judges to function umpire in a court-ordered appraisal, the court docket in the end appointed the Honorable James E. Duffy, a retired justice of the Hawai‘i Supreme Court docket, over the insurer’s nominee, Choose Religion S. Hochberg, a retired U.S. District Court docket decide from New Jersey. The court docket’s rationale gives essential steering for choosing impartial umpires in appraisal proceedings.
Each Justice Duffy and Choose Hochberg introduced impeccable credentials. Justice Duffy had over three a long time of expertise as a trial lawyer and 9 years on Hawai‘i’s highest court docket, and he had served as a mediator, arbitrator, or particular grasp in additional than 300 issues. Choose Hochberg, likewise, had vital expertise in complicated litigation and served on the federal bench for a number of years. Neither social gathering questioned the integrity, availability, or impartiality of the opposite’s nominee. With {qualifications} and impartiality evenly matched, the court docket turned to a 3rd and decisive issue: proximity to the positioning of the loss.
In its filings and supplemental letter to the court docket, BRE Resorts emphasised that Justice Duffy’s deep connection to Hawai‘i used to be important. Citing each modern and historic case legislation, BRE argued that appraisers and umpires with localized data are higher geared up to evaluate development prices, perceive storm impacts particular to the area’s microclimates, and consider the realities of restore and reconstruction in Hawai‘i’s distinctive setting.
This was not only a matter of comfort. It was a matter of substantive perception. The policyholder cited instances going again greater than a century to indicate that courts have lengthy favored native umpires who can carry context-specific experience to bear on questions of property worth and scope of loss.
The court docket agreed. Its order reaffirmed the three central standards utilized in umpire choice:
- Expertise with the kind of loss at situation
- Lack of bias
- Geographic proximity to the broken property.
The primary two standards being impartial, the court docket discovered proximity to weigh closely in favor of Justice Duffy. His long-standing presence in Hawaii meant he was already conversant in native development dynamics and pricing realities. His appointment would additionally keep away from the extra journey and lodging prices that will inevitably outcome from appointing an umpire primarily based on the mainland.
This ruling provides a worthwhile lesson for events engaged in appraisal disputes. Whereas expertise and neutrality are baseline necessities, courts will give significant consideration to geographic proximity when all different elements are comparatively equal. Familiarity with native circumstances, prices, and practices can change into a decisive benefit in litigation over umpire appointments, notably in areas with distinctive environmental or financial traits.
The court docket’s choice to nominate Justice Duffy not solely acknowledged his {qualifications} and judicial temperament but additionally affirmed the significance of choosing an umpire who understands the native context. The ruling is a powerful reminder that native data can matter as a lot as technical experience when a decide selects the umpire.
Thought For The Day
“The umpire mentioned I used to be protected, and that’s all that issues. Now, whether or not I really was is up for debate.”
— Yogi Berra
1 Bre Resorts & Resorts v. Ace American Ins. Co., No. 24-00159 (D. Haw. Apr. 25, 2025).
