Facts:  After a dispute arose between petitioner Fluor Daniel, Inc. and the respondent Department of Corrections regarding the terms of a contract to construct a prison, both parties agreed to binding arbitration.  The arbitrator subsequently found in favor of Fluor Daniel and awarded it $5,997,645.  Fluor Daniel submitted the decision to the Superior Court for King County for the entry of a judgment and also requested an award of pre-judgment interest for the period that elapsed between the arbitration and the judgment.  The superior court granted Fluor Daniel’s request and awarded it pre-judgment interest, ruling that because the arbitrator’s decision could not be appealed, the damages awarded were fixed and interest began to accrue.  The Department of Corrections appealed the award of pre-judgment interest and the Washington Court of Appeals reversed.  Fluor Daniel appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.

Question(s):   Is the prevaling party in a binding arbitration entitled to pre-judgment interest for the period between the arbitration and the entry of a judgment?

Conclusion:  Justice Chambers’ opinion for the Court affirmed the Washington Court of Appeals, concluding that unless the parties’ arbitration agreement states otherwise, interest does not accrue in the period between the arbitration and the entry of a judgment regardless of the finality of the arbitration.

Docket No. 78290-3 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 55867-6)

Petitioner: Fluor Daniel, Inc.

(Counsel: Richard Miles Stanislaw and Christopher Wright)

Respondent: Department of Corrections

(Counsel: Douglas D. Shaftel and Steve Edwin Dietrich)

Argument: Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:00am

[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]

Decided: Friday, July 6th, 2007

Prevailing Party: Department of Corrections (Respondent)

Vote: 8-1

Citation: Pending

Court: Alexander3 Court (2005-2007)

Alexander

Johnson

Madsen

Sanders

Bridge

Chambers

Owens

Fairhurst

Johnson