Suksdorf v. Suksdorf

• Decision Date: 12 December 1916
• Docket Number: 13477.
• Parties: SUKSDORF v. SUKSDORF.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

161 P. 465

93 Wash. 667

SUKSDORF v. SUKSDORF.

No. 13477.

Supreme Court of Washington

December 12, 1916

Department 1. Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; Bruce Blake Judge.

Arbitration agreement between Henry F. Suksdorf and F. W. Suksdorf, with an award in favor of Henry F. Suksdorf. From an order of the superior court, vacating the judgment on the award, Henry F Suksdorf appeals. Reversed, with directions to reinstate the judgment.

W. C Jones and George W. Belt, both of Spokane, for appellant.

Davis &amp Heil, of Spokane, for respondent.

FULLERTON J.

On March 23, 1915, Henry F. Suksdorf and F. W. Suksdorf, for the purpose of settling various controversies between them which extended over a number of years, entered into the following written arbitration agreement:

'This agreement, made and entered into between Henry F. Suksdorf, plaintiff herein, and F. W. Suksdorf, defendant herein, witnesseth: That whereas, a controversy has arisen and existed between plaintiff and defendant for many years, arising out of an accounting for 8,000 bushels of wheat received by defendant for plaintiff about 20 years ago, and out of the right to purchase certain land near Spokane Bridge and near Spangle, about 500 acres, which plaintiff claims to have procured for defendant, and out of a promissory note of defendant for $1,800.00 to plaintiff, on which plaintiff claims that but $1,450.00 and interest has been paid, and it being admitted that defendant claims various credits for payments made, also for the value of services rendered plaintiff; and whereas, defendant also claims other defenses; and whereas, said parties have been unable to agree as to the respective amounts for which each is entitled to credit, and also disagree as to the validity of several of the claims and counterclaims and credits aforesaid: Now, therefore, the said parties do hereby agree to submit their differences as aforesaid, and all others since 1884, to the award of Thomas Conlan, W. C. Gray, and Henry Rohwer, mutually selected by them for the purpose of arbitration. It is further agreed that the parties hereto waive the benefit or defense of the statute of limitations.'

A majority of the arbitrators found that F. W. Suksdorf was indebted to H. F. Suksdorf in the sum of $2,500. The award was filed with the clerk of the superior court of Spokane county, and motion made before the court for its confirmation. Over the exception of F. W. Suksdorf, the award was confirmed, and judgment rendered in favor of H. F. Suksdorf for the amount found due by the award. Thereafter F. W. Suksdorf filed a motion to vacate the judgment and order affirming the award, which motion was granted by the court, 'for the reason that the agreement to arbitrate contained no express stipulation that the parties thereto would abide by or perform the award.' From the order vacating the judgment on the award, H. F. Suksdorf prosecutes this appeal.

The court based its order vacating the confirmation of the award on the theory that, under Rem. & Bal. Code, §§ 420-430, providing a statutory method for arbitration and award, it was necessary for the parties to agree to 'abide the award,' in order to give the superior court jurisdiction to enter judgment upon an award without suit thereon. The only support for this position is found in section 421, which provides:

'Said agreement to arbitrate shall be in writing, signed by the parties, and may be by bond in any sum, conditioned that the parties entering into said submission shall abide the award.'

To uphold the decision of the superior court it would be necessary to construe the foregoing section to mean that the arbitration agreement should be conditioned in terms that the parties should abide the award. We think the clause 'conditioned that the parties entering into said submission shall abide the award' applies solely to an arbitration 'by bond' mentioned in the statute, and relates to the conditions of the bond, not to the...