Arbitration: Arbitrator resolves dispute among church members

Where members of a church argued the circuit court erred when it confirmed an arbitration award, but the record showed an enforceable arbitration agreement, the appellants conceded they were members of the church and thus subject to the agreement and the arbitrator found the agreement covered the claims at issue, the circuit court’s decision was affirmed.

Background

Mark McLeod, Chantel McLeod and Damon McLeod, together with Church on the Move Inc., appeal from the circuit court’s order confirming an arbitration award in favor of Eric Parekh, Wade Haskins, Deryck Frye, My Freedom Church Inc. and Connect Church. That arbitration involved the faith-based resolution of various claims by the McLeods arising from a dispute within Move Church.

Appeal

The appellees assert that the McLeods did not comply with the procedural requirements of the Virginia Uniform Arbitration Act, or VUAA, in bringing this appeal. The appellees are incorrect. Under Code § 8.01-581.016, the McLeods could not appeal the circuit court’s order compelling arbitration until the court issued the final order.

Appellees next assert that appellants waived their appeal by failing to move to vacate the arbitration award. The court again disagrees. The VUAA requires a motion to vacate when the circuit court did not grant a motion to compel arbitration over the appellants’ objection. Here, there is an arbitration agreement. And the circuit court compelled arbitration in a decision adverse to the appellants. Code § 8.01-581.010(5) therefore does not apply to this situation.

The McLeods did not acquiesce to mediation in arbitration and so did not thereby waive appellate review of the order compelling arbitration. Indeed, the McLeods challenged the appellees’ motion to compel arbitration under Code § 8.01-581.02. Thereafter, the McLeods complied with the circuit court’s order compelling arbitration. Complying with a lawful order from the circuit court is not a volitional act of acquiescence.

Merits

The McLeods assert that no evidence allowed the circuit court to find the existence of a binding agreement to arbitrate. This court disagrees. The agreement to arbitrate is found in Move Church’s bylaws. The appellees moved those bylaws into evidence. And while the McLeods argue that only certain highlighted portions of the bylaws were entered into evidence, the circuit court expressly found that all the bylaws were entered into evidence. Thus the bylaws were properly before the circuit court.

The McLeods next assert that there was insufficient evidence before the circuit court establishing them as members of Move Church. However, they conceded that they were members of Move Church. Because all parties were members of Move Church at the time the McLeods’ allegations arose, they were bound by its bylaws. There is no assertion that these bylaws are immoral or contradict the law. Nor does the record reveal the basis for such assertions. The circuit court did not err by finding an enforceable agreement among the members of Move Church.

The McLeods next assert that their claims do not arise out of their membership with Move Church, and as such the circuit court erred in finding that their tort claims were arbitrable. The Guidelines for Christian Conciliation—incorporated by Move Church’s bylaws—specify that the “arbitrator shall have the power to rule on his/her own jurisdiction, including any objections with respect to the existence, scope, or validity of the arbitration agreement.” The arbitrator here found the McLeods’ claims arbitrable. The court will not disturb that decision on appeal.

The McLeods finally argue that the appellees needed to obtain an insurance company’s permission before engaging in arbitration. By its plain text, this provision applies to claims against Move Church that might result in an insurance payout. It does not apply to this lawsuit, which involves claims by Move Church.

Affirmed.

McLeod v. Parekh, Record No. 0957-23-4, May 6, 2025. CAV (unpublished opinion) (Chaney). From the Circuit Court of Prince William County (Metzler). Dirk McClanahan (McClanahan Powers, PLLC, on briefs), for appellants. Matthew A. Westover (Garth M. Wainman; Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, P.C., on brief), for appellee Eric Parekh. W. Benjamin Woody (Brennan J. McGovern; Stanley P. Wellman; Thomas S. Garrett; M. Scott Fisher, Jr.; Nancy J. Goodiel; Harman, Claytor, Corrigan & Wellman; DeCaro, Doran, Siciliano, Gallagher & DeBlasis, LLP, on brief), for appellees Wade Haskins, My Freedom Church, Inc., Deryck Frye, and Connect Church. VLW 025-7-111. 15 pp.