ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION of genetically engineered X. Chapter Problems Peterson, Hector Gonzolas, and John Ping are involved in the development and licensing ally engineered agricultural products. Unfortunately, it appears as though a competitor has some of their work. The competitor alleges that the genetically engineered plans were developed andent research and not by using any of their work. They decide that it is necessary to protect Leir rights against the competitor and are considering filing a lawsuit. However, one of the drawbacks the lawsuit is that the case is extremely complicated and there is a fear that a judge and/or jury will he familiar enough with the complex issues, nor be able to educate themselves at the trial, in order to arrive at the proper result. What may be a better choice for them than litigation? Laurence David, M.D. sued Patrick Abergel, M.D. for damages for breach of contract. Abergel answered the complaint and cross-complained against David for damages arising from the same contract. Saheguently, both parties agreed to dismiss the lawsuit and submit their disputes to arbitration. They ested the Honorable Judge Doolittle, retired, as the arbitrator, giving him the power to grant any remedy or relief for which a party is entitled under California law." Following the arbitration hearing, the arbitrator denied all relief requested by David, awarding Abergel the sum of $9,335.02. The arbitrator found that David had "fabricated a carpet of illusion" based upon a complaint that was an attempt ... to weave a claim from threads of false statements." described David's claims as "patently ridiculous, bizarre, absolutely false and so incorrect and unsupported by the evidence as to be tragic," found that David and his witnesses took so many "inconsistent positions and discovered at trial that it appeared they all suffered from chronological dyslexia." As a result of the frivolous action by David, Abergel submitted a motion to the arbitrator to award sanctions of $75,000 for Abergel's attorney's fees in resolving the dispute. In an attempt to discourage frivolous lawsuits, California Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5 provides that judges and arbitrators may penalize a party for bringing frivolous litigation or arbitration by awarding sanctions making the frivolous party pay, among other things, attorney's fees. David objected that the power given to the arbitrator did not allow for the awarding of attorney's fees as sanctions. Nevertheless, the arbitrator awarded $75,000 to Abergel. Is David correct and why or why not? 3. Plaintiff Tri-Cor. Inc., and the defendant, City of Hawthorne, had entered into a contract for the construction by the plaintiff of an airport administration building. The contract did not contain an arbitration clause. Construction was delayed and plaintiff sued for relief alleging the delay was due to the fault of the city. The city filed an answer and a cross-complaint, alleging that the delay was due to fault of the le ault of the plaintiff and seeking damages from Tri-Cor, Inc. The attorneys for the plaintiff and the attorney discussed the possibility of arbitration. Both attorneys agreed to arbitration but the city to agree to arbitration. The plaintiffsued to compel arbitration. Must the City of Hawthorne arbitrate and why or why not? 101 Laurence David, M.D. sued Patrick Abergel, M.D. for damages for breach of contract. Abergel answered the complaint and cross-complained against David for damages arising from the same contract. Subsequently, both parties agreed to dismiss the lawsuit and submit their disputes to arbitration. They selected the Honorable Judge Doolittle, retired, as the arbitrator, giving him the power to "grant any remedy or relief for which a party is entitled under California law." Following the arbitration hearing, the arbitrator denied all relief requested by David, awarding Abergel the sum of $9,335.02. The arbitrator found that David had "fabricated a carpet of illusion" based upon a complaint that was an "attempt ... to weave a claim from threads of false statements," described David's claims as "patently ridiculous, bizarre, absolutely false and so incorrect and unsupported by the evidence as to be tragic," found that David and his witnesses took so many "inconsistent positions" and discovered at trial that it appeared they all suffered from "chronological dyslexia." As a result of the frivolous action by David, Abergel submitted a motion to the arbitrator to award sanctions of $75,000 for Abergel's attorney's fees in resolving the dispute. In an attempt to discourage frivolous lawsuits, California Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5 provides that judges and arbitrators may penalize a party for bringing frivolous litigation or arbitration by awarding sanctions making the frivolous party pay, among other things, attorney's fees. David objected that the power given to the arbitrator did not allow for the awarding of attorney's fees as sanctions. Nevertheless, the arbitrator awarded $75,000 to Abergel. Is David correct and why or why not