This article serves as the twelfth and concluding installment in a comprehensive 12-part series on domestic arbitration, designed to provide a clear and practical guide through every stage of the process. In this edition, “Enforcing and Collecting Arbitration Awards: The Final Step Toward Justice,” we examine the legal framework and procedural steps involved in enforcing an arbitration award and securing compliance. With this final chapter, we bring the series on domestic arbitration to its conclusion. An arbitration award, no matter how well reasoned or elegantly written, achieves its true purpose only when it is enforced. The journey from hearing to award is the heart of arbitration—but enforcement is its lifeblood. Without it, even the most meticulous proceeding risks becoming a paper victory.
—————
From award to judgment: Understanding the legal bridge
Once an arbitrator issues a final award, the prevailing party’s focus must shift swiftly from persuasion to enforcement. In domestic arbitration, this usually begins with confirming the award in court. Under Sections 9 through 13 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and comparable state statutes, a party may petition the appropriate court — typically a circuit or federal district court — to confirm the award and have it entered as a judgment. Timing is critical. The FAA provides a one-year window from the date of the award to file a petition for confirmation, though prompt action is always best practice. A court’s confirmation transforms the award into a judgment “having the same force and effect as any other judgment,” enabling collection by the usual means — garnishment, liens, or execution. Courts have a narrow role at this stage. They are not appellate bodies for arbitrators. Unless a statutory ground for vacatur or modification exists — such as evident partiality, misconduct, or excess of authority — the award must be confirmed. The judiciary’s restrained posture underscores a fundamental principle: finality is the crown jewel of arbitration.
—————
The respondent’s resistance: Motions to vacate or modify
A losing party may seek to vacate or modify the award within three months of its issuance under Section 12 of the FAA. Courts, however, apply these provisions narrowly. The burden is steep, and the evidentiary threshold high. Common missteps include mere disagreement with the arbitrator’s reasoning or an attempt to re-argue the merits — grounds that never justify vacatur. For practitioners, this underscores the importance of procedural precision. Ensuring that the record reflects fairness, notice, and an opportunity to be heard can fortify an award against later attack. An enforceable award is not born in the courthouse — it is built during the arbitration itself.
—————
The mechanics of confirmation: How to file and proceed
A typical confirmation petition includes: Verified petition or motion citing the FAA (or state act); Copy of the arbitration agreement and the final award; Affidavit of service on the opposing party; Proposed judgment order for the court’s signature. Filing in the jurisdiction where the arbitration occurred — or where the losing party or its assets are located — strategically positions the prevailing side for efficient enforcement. Some courts allow summary procedures, while others may set a brief hearing. Unless a valid opposition is filed, confirmation is usually granted as a matter of course. When drafting, counsel should remember that courts favor succinct, fact-based petitions that demonstrate procedural regularity and compliance with deadlines. Over-argument can be counterproductive; credibility, not verbosity, wins the day.
—————
From judgment to collection: Turning paper into payment
Once confirmed, the award takes on new life as a judicial judgment. Enforcement then proceeds under the state’s civil enforcement mechanisms — typically those applicable to any money judgment. Practical tools include: Writs of garnishment or attachment against bank accounts, wages, or accounts receivable; Judgment liens recorded against real property; Execution orders allowing seizure and sale of non-exempt assets; post-judgment discovery to identify hidden or transferred assets. Creative enforcement may also involve negotiating payment plans, obtaining consent judgments, or leveraging reputational incentives when the opposing party values confidentiality or ongoing business relationships. In short, collection requires both legal precision and strategic diplomacy. The tone of enforcement—firm yet professional—often determines how swiftly compliance follows.
—————
State vs. Federal considerations
In Michigan and most states, the Uniform Arbitration Act supplements federal provisions, allowing confirmation, modification, or vacatur through local courts. Counsel should always verify which statute governs the arbitration agreement and whether it contains any venue or procedural requirements. For example, while the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA, 9 U.S.C. § 9) requires a motion to confirm an arbitration award to be filed within one year, Michigan’s Uniform Arbitration Act (MCL 691.1702) imposes no such deadline. However, certain procedural distinctions such as methods of service, filing requirements, or the form of judgment entry can differ. Navigating this dual framework effectively ensures that an award is not lost in a procedural gap between federal and state law.
—————
Beyond confirmation: Interest, costs, and attorney fees
A confirmed award may include post-judgment interest, calculated under the applicable state or federal rate, to compensate for delay in payment. When contracts or statutes provide for attorney fees or collection costs, the prevailing party should expressly request them in the petition. Courts often respect such contractual provisions, viewing them as part of the bargained-for expectation of the parties. For example, an arbitrator’s award granting $100,000 with a contractual interest clause at 12% continues to accrue interest until paid. A delay of even a few months can substantially increase the obligation—a quiet yet powerful incentive for compliance.
—————
The symbolism of enforcement
Enforcement is not merely procedural; it is symbolic. It reaffirms the legitimacy of arbitration as a binding and respected process. Each confirmed award strengthens the ecosystem of alternative dispute resolution by signaling to the legal community that arbitration delivers not just decisions—but results. As one federal court aptly stated, “An arbitration award is not an invitation to negotiation; it is the end of the debate.” The power of enforcement ensures that endures. This twelfth and final installment mark the culmination of our exploration into the practice and procedure of domestic arbitration. From the first notice of arbitration to the final act of enforcement, we have traced the lifecycle of disputes resolved outside the courthouse yet within the rule of law. Enforcement is where theory meets consequence. It is where the neutral’s pen finds its echo in the judge’s gavel and it reminds us that arbitration’s promise—efficiency, finality, and fairness—means little without the certainty of compliance. To all who have followed this series: may your next award not only be well-reasoned, but well-respected—and, most importantly, well-enforced.
—————
Harshitha Ram is an international disputes attorney, arbitrator, mediator, and lecturer in law. She is the President of the Global Arbitration Mediation Academy (GAMA), Chair of the ADR Section of the DBA, and the Co-Chair of the ABA Arbitration Committee. To learn more or connect, visit: www.harshitharam.com | www.adracademy.us
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available




