2. Section 18 states that a party may request an "expedited order"under Section 22, "in which case the court shall summarily decide the [motion]." That language is similar to that found in Section 7 that a court in a proceeding to compel or stay arbitration should act "summarily." The term "expedited" has been used in other statutes and court rules. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(4) (an immigration statute providing that when a person is deported and files an appeal, "it shall be the duty of the court to advance on the docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the disposition of any case" under the statute); Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 (providing that if an adverse party contests a court's granting of a temporary restraining order the court must proceed as expeditiously as "the ends of justice require" and the hearing for a preliminary injunction "shall be set down for hearing at the earliest possible time and takes precedence of all matters except older matters of the same character."); Cal. St. Bar P. R. 203 (stating that in cases involving the state bar in California, "a motion to set aside or vacate a default judgment shall be decided on an expedited basis."). The intent of the term "expedited" is that a court should, to the extent possible, advance on the docket a matter involving the enforcement of an arbitrator's preaward ruling in order to preserve the integrity of the arbitration proceeding which is underway.

The term "summarily" has the same meaning as in Section 7 that a trial court should expeditiously and without a jury trial determine whether an arbitrator's preaward ruling should be enforced. Grad v. Wetherholt Galleries, 660 A.2d 903 (D.C. 1995); Wallace v. Wiedenbeck, 251 A.D.2d 1091, 674 N.Y.S.2d 230, 231 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998); Burke v. Wilkins, 131 N.C.App. 687, 507 S.E.2d 913 (1998); In re MHI P'ship, Ltd., 7 S.W.3d 918 (Tex. Ct. App. 1999).

3. There is no provision in RUAA Section 28 for an appeal from a court decision on a preaward ruling by an arbitrator. The intent of the statute is not to allow such orders from a lower court to be appealed.

4. An arbitrator's order denying a request for a preaward ruling is not subject to an action for review under Section 18 because (1) such a provision would lead to delay and more