arbitration award because arbitrator Southworth’s actions in making ex parte contact with a witness for the plaintiff constituted misconduct in violation of G.S. § l-567.13(a)(2). This statute provides: (a) Upon application of a party, the court shall vacate an award where: (2) There was evident partiality by an arbitrator appointed as a neutral or corruption in any of the arbitrators or misconduct prejudicing the rights of any party. G.S. § l-567.13(a)(2) (1983). An arbitration award is ordinarily presumed valid and the burden of proving specific grounds for vacating an award rests on the party attacking it. Thomas v. Howard, 51 N.C. App. 350 n & Jones Construction Co., 72 N.C. App. 149, 154-55, 323 S.E.2d 466, 469-70 (1984), disc. review denied, 313 N.C. 507, 329 S.E.2d 396 (1985) (<HOLDING>). Defendants have failed to carry their burden
recognizing commonwealth court authority supporting proposition that arbitrators exceeded their jurisdiction when they considered issues which were not properly presented in the demand for arbitration holding that arbitrators were not guilty of misconduct by receiving evidence from one party and using it in their deliberations when it was not properly before them holding that it is not holding that it may not holding that although party participated in arbitration even presenting argument on merits it had not waived its objection to arbitrators jurisdiction because it consistently objected to arbitrators jurisdiction throughout proceedings