Hon. Billie Colombaro (Ret.) | Arbitrator & Mediator

I bring something to the arbitration table that few neutrals can offer: years of experience as a sitting judge, where I presided over complex, high-stakes litigation across a wide range of subject matters. That background shapes everything — how I manage a hearing, how I weigh evidence, how I analyze legal arguments, and how I write awards. Counsel can expect the same rigor and preparation they would bring to a courtroom, without the delays and procedural overhead of court.

I treat the Preliminary Hearing Conference as one of the most important stages of the entire process. It is where I work with counsel to establish a realistic, efficient procedural framework tailored to the specific needs of the case — discovery parameters, motion practice, briefing schedules, and hearing logistics. Time invested at the front end pays dividends throughout. Counsel should come prepared to have a substantive conversation, not merely exchange pleasantries.

Proportionality. Discovery in arbitration should be calibrated to the complexity and dollar value of the dispute — not imported wholesale from federal court practice. I work with counsel to identify the categories of documents and depositions that are genuinely necessary, and I push back on requests that are more about leverage than legitimate need. The goal is to get the right information in the right amount of time to make the process fair for all parties.

I entertain motions that serve a legitimate purpose: narrowing the issues, addressing threshold legal questions, or protecting a party’s rights. I do not permit motion practice to become a delay tactic or a cost-inflating exercise. Before any substantive motion is filed, I require a concise submission outlining the basis for the motion and its likely impact on the proceedings. I will then determine whether a full briefing is warranted.

Promptly. One of the principal advantages of arbitration over litigation is the ability to obtain a final, binding resolution in a reasonable timeframe — and that advantage evaporates if the arbitrator sits on the award. Counsel and parties should expect a well-reasoned award issued on a timeline that respects the urgency that brought them to arbitration in the first place.

Yes, when requested by the parties or required by the applicable rules. A reasoned award provides counsel and the parties with the analytical basis for my decision, which can be valuable — particularly in matters where the parties have an ongoing relationship or where appellate review is a consideration. I am happy to discuss award format preferences during the preliminary conference. I never forget that arbitration is the parties’ process.

I take that seriously and address it directly. My experience on the bench taught me to recognize dilatory tactics quickly, and I am not reluctant to use the tools available to me — adverse inferences, cost-shifting, sanctions where appropriate — to protect the integrity of the process and the interests of the party that is engaged in good faith. Arbitration is meant to be an efficient alternative to litigation, not a slower version of it.

Yes. I am highly experienced and fully comfortable conducting hearings by secure video conference. I provide and host the platform at no administrative cost to the parties. I have presided over numerous complex, multi-party virtual arbitrations—efficiently, effectively, and without issue.


Whether conducted remotely or in person, each matter receives the identical meticulous preparation, focused attention to detail, and the same expectation of professionalism, preparedness, and civility from all participants.