Confirmation of an arbitration award; MCR 3.602(I); Alleged fraud in procuring the award; MCL 691.1703(1)(a); MCR 3.602(J)(2)(a) & (3); Harmless error

Holding that the trial court properly rejected defendant’s fraud argument, the court agreed with the trial court that plaintiff “was entitled to have his arbitration award against defendant confirmed.” Thus, it affirmed the trial court’s order granting plaintiff summary disposition in this action seeking confirmation of the arbitration award. Defendant asserted that “he should be able to conduct further discovery into whether plaintiff procured the arbitration award through fraud on the basis of communications that a state regulatory body sent to plaintiff at” a certain email address. He contended that these emails suggested “that the arbitration award was procured through fraud because they show that plaintiff used this email address to communicate with the state regulatory agency, yet plaintiff never disclosed this email address to defendant during arbitration.” To support this claim, defendant offered evidence that the regulatory agency associated the “email address with plaintiff, and that [it] had sent emails to plaintiff at this email address. But defendant failed to produce any evidence supporting his assertion that plaintiff failed to disclose this email address to defendant during arbitration. Without” such evidence, defendant did not present “evidence sufficient to establish that ‘further discovery presents a fair likelihood of uncovering factual support for’ defendant’s assertion that plaintiff procured the arbitration award through fraud.”