ARBITRATION OUTLINE I. Background and Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements A. AMFInc v. Brunswick Corp.

(1985) ² parties entered into agreement to enter into non-binding arbitration. Held that arbitration agreements were enforceable as an equitable remedy under the FAA. B. Cheng-Canadian v. Renaissance (1996) ² issue of arose out of a wrongful termination suit in which the employee handbook had an arbitration clause that allowed for an arbitration to be run by managers of the hotel/employer. i. Held that they did not have to go to arbitration, because it did not allow for a 3rd party decision maker, a final judgment, or a level of impartiality. C. Kabia v. Koch (2000) ² Guy brought action for libel and slander for things stated in an arbitration of People·s Court. Held that the action should be dismissed, because judicial immunity still applied in arbitration.

D. C&L Enterprises v. Indians ² Indians signed a contract that contained an
arbitration clause for a roof. Indians proposed the terms of the contract. The contract was breached by the Indians, and they claimed sovereign immunity. ii. The SC held that the arbitration clause was binding on the Indians. iii. Reasoning: Contracting for arbitration clauses effectively waived the sovereign immunity. General Contract Law Defense A. There is an emphatic federal policy towards arbitration. B. If it is in writing, the defenses are limited to ordinary contract defenses. C. FAA has been declared by the legislature to be a substantive law; therefore, it pre-empts any state statutes. D. Substantive arbitability ² whether or not they have already agreed to have arbitration (courts) E. Procedural arbitability ² whether or not it follows the procedure of the arbitration (arbitrator) F. Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Concklin Mfg. Co (1967) ² prima bought the other, and there was a blanket arbitration clause. They found out that it was actually entered into by fraud, and they complained that it was not to be arbitrated. i. SC held arbitrator got to hear it, unless the fraud was specific to the arbitration clause. G. First Options v. Kaplan ² (1995) Kaplan·s were a stock trader and his wife, who had not themselves, signed the arbitration agreement. Agreement was between the clearinghouse and the investment company. The clearinghouse sued them, saying they were individually liable.

II.

Page 1 of 15

Bank of America (1998) ² Bank sent extra attachments along with monthly statements. Dobson ² if you try to get the benefits of the contract. i. telling the customers that they were adding an ADR agreement to their contract. Engaging in detailed. Held there should be no arbitration. when someone sits on their rights for so long that it prejudices the other party. Held this shrink-wrap contract was enough to manifest assent to the contract. protracted litigation 3. and the arbitration agreement stood. The arbitration clause was buried inside another window of terms and uses. J. Conducting extensive discovery iv. acts inconsistent with it. Adams ² the employee signed a contract of adhesion with the employer. N. and thus a suit. Badie v. Take action inconsistent with arbitration 2. (2002) ² there was downloadable software. no arbitration. Held was unR and unforeseeable they would have looked through it. because it was not part of the existing. Gateway ² ordered a computer. Netscape Communications Corp. H. and immediately upon hitting enter it gave away all of your information.µ i. Defenses to Arbitration agreements: i. Circuit City v. Neighborhood Health Clinics ² woman got the employee manual. Page 2 of 15 . Hill v. Waiver by estoppels ² when you waive something such that going back in would unduly prejudice the other party iii. and part of it had an arbitration agreement. Laches ² equitable defense. Specht v. and the attached paperwork included a contract with an arbitration clause that would take effect after day 30. After that time. because they had not signed the arbitration agreement themselves. Filing a counter-claim rather than a motion to compel 4. Gibson v. ii. Terminex v. SC held it was for the cts to decide whether or not they decided to arbitrate. How to waive your right to arbitrate1. and causes prejudice on the other side.i. i. and thus did not manifest an assent to the arbitration clause. but you clicked ´I agree. *Knowledge of right to arbitration. K. and did nothing against the company. i. then you are held to that contract. M. Held this contract lacked consideration. L. original contract. because it forced them to arbitrate and limited remedies. I. Gateway filed a motion to compel arbitration.

SC held it would stay in court. i. and (2) possible prohibitive costs do not automatically make the arbitration unenforceable. and therefore struck down the arbitration agreement. and was denied. Page 3 of 15 III. O. v. ² Alabama v. S. D. Rule: Non-signatories can be bound. But the company kept pushing off the arbitration agreement over and over. . Procedural Issues A. Alberto-Culver ² distinguishes Wilko b·c transaction was an international one. B. E. when reached by theories of contract and agency law. P. and finally if it was unenforceable due to possible prohibitive costs to arbitrate. American Arbitration Association i. Phillips (1999) ² Lady quit filing suit of sexual harassment. Binding Non-Signatories to Agreements to Arbitrate A. Waffle House ² US Sup. including the third neutral. i. IV. back pay. Held doing so violated the good faith and fair dealing. Inc v. Thomson-CSF. They claimed that it was fraud in the inducement on behalf of the arbitration clause. Hooters of America. Cassarotto ² Conspicuous notice of arbitration on k. i. Held it was a K of adhesion.i. Sherk v. Permanente Medical Group ² guy sued for medical malpractice suit. Submitting a statutory claim to arbitration is permissible. and therefore unconscionable. EEOC v. Gardner Denver ² Ct held that unionized employee·s earlier exercise of the compulsory arbitration provision in a collective bargaining agreement did not preclude him from later pursuing a Title VII discrimination claim in a judicial forum. v. Engalla v. cheaper way of doing it. and they had entered into an arbitration group that they said was the faster. because they are too remote to be seen.A. Employer sought arbitration. Doctor·s Assoc. Alexander v. Green Tree Financial Corp. This was a Securities Exchange Act claim that was found to be arbitral C. Randolph (2000) ² There was a decision as to whether the arbitration agreement could be appealed after arbitration was compelled and claims dismissed. and select the group in which the arbitrator was supposed to come from. or reinstatement on behalf of the employee. Ct held an employee·s agreement to arbitrate does not preclude the EEOC from seeking to recover in court relief such as damages. since the arbitration agreement was entered into by fraud. The arbitration agreement allowed for the employer to select the arbitrator. so he made an interlocutory appeal. Held (1) decisions to arbitrate are final judgments and can be appealed. making the agreement void.

Soler Chrysler Plymouth. EEOC claim. Held the fed ct could grant an injunction of a state action pending arbitration. B. D. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. The Court denied arbitration. holding that a ct in one jdx cannot compel arbitration in another jdx. the federal court had a motion for preliminary injunction. and after filing for arbitration in state court. There were 2 customer agreements that had arbitration clauses. ² there was an arbitration agreement. The SC held all the claims must be arbitrated. ii.The court remanded the case to determine whether there was subject matter jurisdiction. This claim was brought in Colorado federal court. and RICO claims. i. Qwest Communications Corp. Rule: Burden is on the party opposing the arbitration to show that the statute implicitly or expressly waived the right to arbitration. i. McMahon ² (1987) Plaintiffs were customers of a brokerage firm. Shearson American Express v. then it can also waive the right to arbitration. i. iii. D. C. The guy wanted to send it to arbitration even though it·s a statutory claim. Page 4 of 15 . C.V. Held it was appropriate and upheld arbitration on the ADEA. Ansari v. They brought actions based on state contract law. Rule: If there is an irreconcilable conflict between arbitration and the statute. and so they enforced it even though it was a statutory claim. court held it was the underlying subject matter of the complaint. Wilko v. Specialty Bakeries v. Held they had K for it. i. there was a treaty that makes them enforceable. Arbitrability of Federal Statutory Claims A. (Later overturned) B. i. i. but the underlying dispute itself i. SEC claims. Robhal. There was a breach in the contract. Now. *Gilmer v. so he brought a claim based on ADEA for age discrimination. ² there was an arbitration agreement that agreed to arbitrate in DC. ² there was an agreement between the American company and the Japanese company that had an arbitration agreement. Swan ² customer pled a breach in a securities act. Held it was an improper forum since there could be a result that was less than law. and when he was let go he was 62. and there was a marginal arbitration agreement. holding that the arbitration agreement does not create subject matter jurisdiction under the FAA. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp ² (1991) Guy started employment with D and contract included an agreement with arbitration. Discover Bank v Vaden. Inc. Inc.

VII. iv. that was seen only as an article 3 procedural law. Randolph ² Randolph brought suit under TILA act. it was simply only available in federal court. US Lines was claiming bankruptcy. The USAA was the original arbitration act. and following Erie. Background i.E. ii. i. F. then they lack the power. and there was suing for asbestos from its employees. Ala. i. The SC said they owe no such deference when the agency·s interpretation is unreasonable. because it expressly prohibits binding arbitration. i. Inc. If not a core proceeding. v. and therefore kept her from pursuing federal statutory claims in arbitration. iii. Page 5 of 15 VI. so you must apply state law. Green tree financial of Alabama v. And even though the FTA interpreted it to preclude enforcing binding arbitration. Erie Railroad v. Code said there should be no binding pre-dispute arbitration. then bankruptcy court has power to stay arbitration. Then they codified it and called it the FAA. She contended that it failed to protect her from potentially substantial costs of litigation. Thompkins ² there is no federal substantive law. they still upheld the state law. and her agreement included an arbitration clause. . Burnhart v. The insurance clubs had agreements to pay the employees first. In re American Homestar ² plaintiffs bought a mobile home. SC sent it to arbitration because there was no evidence to show that it would put any kind of burden on her. *IF it is a core proceeding. and it is her burden to prove that the substantial costs would keep her from it. Polygraphic ² even though they said the FAA was substantive. ii. and part of the contract included a warranty with arbitration provisions. SC held it should be sent to arbitration because it was not expressly or implicitly prohibited and that it did not adversely affect the underlying purpose of the action. In re US Lines. ii. Rule: Bankruptcy courts have exclusive jurisdiction over core proceedings of equity claims. SC held this was a core proceeding and thus is within the discretion to be heard by the bankruptcy court. FAA and State Law and the Scope of the FAA A. ² (1999) Arbitration agreement between the insurance co and this co. Arbitrability and Statutory Rights and Remedies A. iii.

The agreement continued an arbitration agreement. There was a claim. but rather that it actually involved commerce. which was enough in this case to say that it affected interstate commerce. therefore it is invalid. Citizens reneged on the deal to send the money. Allstate Insurance Co. B. Held FAA pre-empted the state law under the supremacy clause. breach of fiduciary duty. but also that the VAA was not made specifically to regulate insurance. Little v. The McCarron Ferguson Act leaves insurance regulation to the states. The lower courts held that the FAA was not applicable in this case. vii. and could be upheld unless that·s what·s being attacked. i. Alafabco ² In AL. and Alafabco sued. and further that it was applicable in both federal and state courts. Circuit City Stores v. Citizens v. and a violation of the California Franchise Investment Law. SC held it should go to arbitration. SC held you shouldn·t look at whether the parties contemplated that it would affect interstate commerce. SC held it should go to arbitration because the FAA was to be construed broad. i. Adams ² guy signed an employment contract that had an arbitration agreement. railroad workers. Coan v. SC held not only does the FAA pre-empt the VAA. and the contract had an arbitration clause. D. Page 6 of 15 .vi. there was a K signed that included an arbitration clause. i. and that these kind of agreements also involved commerce. but also that it was favored. Moses H. and that the arbitration clause was special. Southland v. brought in state court including claims of fraud. C. i. which still had the statute that did not favor pre-dispute arbitration. or any other class of workers engaged in foreign interstate commerce did not extend to all employment contracts. there were a couple debt-restructuring agreements that included arbitration agreements subject to the FAA in order to fund growing a corporation. because the K didn·t ´involve commerceµ as the FAA purported. The VAA doesn·t allow for arbitration of insurance claims. Mercury Construction Company ² said it was not only substantive law. They purported that arbitration was not allowed under the CFIL. ² there was a dispute that involved insurance coverage. E. i. Prima Paint ² stood for the seperability doctrine. Keating ² (1984) there was an agreement between the owner of a bunch of 7-11s and the franchisees. because the exception to employees of seamen. Allied-Bruce Terminex (1995) ² In AL. F. for termite control in this one particular house in Birmingham.

Deals w/commercial dealings of international parties. all other claims could be arbitrated. and rendering of medical services. The New York Convention r·qs countries w/in it that they will recognize arbitration agreements that are in writing between parties. which was affirmed by the district court. pre-empting the state law because they were allowed to get it under NASD. Volt Information Sciences. Held class actions are allowed in arbitration. B. and 3. ii. Factor Test as to whether there was insurance: 1. i. stating that arbitration should be performed in the state in which the construction was to take place. H. Page 7 of 15 . Held FAA is not pre-emptive of state law when the parties themselves contracted to be governed by it. They asked to stay the proceedings according to state law which said you must do so when 3rd parties who were not signatory you must stay the action pending the court. 1. v. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University (1989) ² There was a construction k. Discover Bank v. and they sought injunctive relief i. Choice of Law Issues A. Shearson Lehmon Hutton Inc ² couple went to arbitration that was supposed to be under the choice of law of New York and then the NASD agreement allowed it and was awarded punitive damage. Mastrabono v. Whether the practice has the effect of transferring or spreading a policyholder·s risk 2. IX. Enforcing International Agreements A. but in this case it was not allowed because the state law that they had it precluded arbitration. marketing. i. Held punitive damages were allowed. however. Whether the practice is limited to entities within the insurance industry G. PacifiCare Health Systems ² guy suing for unfair business practices and false advertising in connection with PacifiCare·s sale.VIII. Superior Court ² there was a suit for deceptive practices with an arbitration agreement involved. Commercial may mean employment under the Convention. i. even if it involved private injunctive relief. i. Whether the practice is an integral part of the policy relationship between the insurer and the insured. with an arbitration clause. SC upheld Boughton which didn·t allow for arbitration of general public injunctive relief. The appellate court reversed because there was a NY statute that didn·t allow for punitive just for arbitration. Inc. Cruz v.

There was public policy in Puerto Rico that it had to be done in Puerto Rico. and injuring 4 (the plaintiffs in this action). The Italian company said that they agreed with the memo.P. Ledee v. Is there an agreement in writing to arbitrate the subject of the dispute? 2.S. and their boat overturned. Does the agreement provide for arbitration in the territory of the signatory of the Convention? Page 8 of 15 D. Star Cruises ² (2005) A steam boiler from Norway exploded in the Port of Miami killing 6 crewmembers. All parties were American. B. Held the convention did not apply to domestic individuals.A. F. to take over the case in Fed court. i. then the memo still applies to arbitration. District Courts have jdx to send something to arbitration via the Convention.A. but the D·s did answer the claim in person in LA. In order to get it towed they had to sign an agreement that said it would agree to English Law. i. i. and agreement was on purchase orders that had not been signed by Lark. which was London. because the idea is not the nationalities parties but the forum state. Held it had to be signed by both parties under the Convention. E. Liberia is not a signatory to the convention. under the convention. Held this should go to arbitration. Sea Tow Services Freeport Ny Inc. i. Questions to Ask to determine whether FAA applies: 1. v.. Held since there as such presumption in favor of arbitration. which included a provision stating that the Russian K that applied. an American company. but not the arbitration clause agreement. to charter goods to Venezuela. Kahn Lucas Lancaser Inc. S. Bautista v.ii. C. Held FAA applied. G.A. The k included an arbitration agreement pursuant to the New York Convention to be arbitrated in London. and then held the FAA pre-empted state law in favor of arbitration. i. All employment contracts contained an arbitration clause. Jones v. because it was a commercial legal relationship governed by the international treaty and not the domestic policy. but does not have the auth. ii.T. ² there was a Couple owned a boat. i. CHILEWICH INTERNATIONAL CORP. FILANTO. Ceramiche Ragno ² Italian Company had a contract with a Puerto Rican Co. to have exclusive rights to sell ceramic tiles. and specifically the arbitration agreement. according to those questions you apply. a Liberian company had a k w/ E. especially in the context of international law. v. . v.T. Held New York Convention precluded the FAA §1 exemption of seaman k. Lark International Ltd. ² memorandum for another shipment of shoes. the other was a Chinese company.S. ² one is a US company. E. M/V ALAIA ² (1989) Advance.

Page 9 of 15 . Lauro . Richards v. and the party with the unfavorable result until afterwards. Deutsche Engineering ² Held it was to be held in the district court of NC where it was filed.Held that the Italian law did not render the arbitration agreement null and void because it wasn·t a recognized defense of fraud. Commonwealth Coatings Corp. Does the agreement arise out of a legal relationship. and that the arbitration was still valid even though they didn·t go because they had notice. v. Then a ´verdictµ B. Held there was no SI b·c they waived it in the arbitration clause. v. and then finally that because the NYCC didn·t do it anymore it did not vitiate the arbitration clause. whether contractual or not. and ignored it. Is a party to the agreement not an American citizen. XI. and that it did not contravene fundamental policies of the forum state. since the ICC did not pick a specific place Arbitration Proceeding A. duress. Then there is possibly a pre-hearing v. and it would still be sent to arbitration.X. Harwyn Int·l. The 3rd arbitrator had worked with the petitioner over the last several years and also worked on some of these deals that the claim had to do with. i. ² Contract between the parties included agreement to arbitrate all controversies. I. Continental Casualty Co. K. Selecting Arbitrators A. and compelled arbitration in Illinois under § 4. There is a demand ii. or does the commercial relationship have some reasonable relation with one or more foreign states? H. B. and those 2 would pick the 3rd. Tolaram Fibers v. Held state did have jurisdiction under the Convention. Val-U Construction Co. ²Held it was the intention of the companies to have the New York Chamber of Commerce do it. Inc. There is an answer iii. DeMe·re· ²There was no forum clause in the contract. Astra Footwear Indus v. Lloyds of England ² Held stay was appropriate because English law still allowed for a sufficient remedy (like fraud) for the plaintiffs. Possible discovery iv. Then there is a true hearing set vi. J. There was no disclosure on behalf of any of the parties. 3. Rosebud Sioux Tribe ² i. The selection process said that each party would pick one. etc. Cycle of the Proceeding i. which is considered as commercial? 4. not the ICC. Rhone Mediterranee v. Jain v.

i. with one of the parties 14 years earlier. i. The process. and that disclosure was important. and there was an arbitration agreement and they went. URanex ² American company had a contract with a French company that sold uranium. Inc. Positive Software v. and arbitrators have a duty to disclose. Salvano ² 2 guys had left Merrill lynch for a competitor and they had an agreement with arbitration clause that said that they were not to take away clients later. D. and had previously worked extensively with the attorney for one side. ² The contract between the parties called for KPMG. Held it was not appropriate to hold someone without ties to this kind of standard. one party·s auditor. based on picking of the parties. They then brought this action for an attachment in another place. Page 10 of 15 . Court vacated the arbitration award because it was an on-going relationship. Held they could get the attachment. to be the arbitrator in case of dispute. v. and asked for a TRO. and it included an arbitration clause. but did not disclose this to the other side. Held it wasn·t appropriate because it did not provide for pre-award removal. and had arbitration. i. v. i. and they hadn·t spoke since. McCreary Tire v. and reversed the ruling that vacated the judgment. i. and had an order to arbitrate. and then there was an extension of the TRO. Held it doesn·t matter. v. They got it. because that was something that the arbitrators could have done. Provisional Remedies A. Held original TRO was appropriate. so you have to. ² 2 insurance companies had a contract with each other. B. Held just b·c you went to arbitration did not mean that you gave up the right to an impartial arbitrator. CEAT ² McReary sued a foreign corporation. There was a breach in the contract. One party sought to disqualify him as an arbitrator because of impartiality. Carolina Power & Light Co. Merit Insurance Co. and vacated the judgment. i. had placed an arbitrator that was once the supervisor. This was never disclosed to the other party. Leatherly Insurance Co. but not the extension. New Century ² Arbitrator was there. you agreed to arbitrate. They sought to get an attachment of a debt owed to URanex. E.XII. They left. in Massachusetts. Merrill Lynch v. loosely. Inc. i. since they had a remedy later. Ryder System. C. because it was the only asset of the D in the US. C. and then Merrill had brought action somewhere else. Aviall. the court in NY ordered arbitration and finally got empanelled.

Consolidated and Class-wide Arbitration A. The agreement was silent as to whether this was ok. Inc. Hay Group v. i. G. Parilla v. Held if you don·t want class-wide arbitration you should put it in the k. Held both the California Arbitration Act and the AAA allowed for the arbitrator to use summary adjudication. but asked for a TRO to get an attachment for the bank account. Pre-hearing Procedure and Motions Practice A. i. Zuver v. Page 11 of 15 . but there was also arbitration. Airtouch Communications ² there was an arbitration agreement. Discovery A. i. Meyer & Susman ² there was arbitration over a payment due a former law partner in his resignation. Held severability clause did not make the arbitration agreement unconscionable. Bazzle ² There was a motion to make it a class. but you can compel them to come and bring the documents. because if it·s silent or ambiguous then class-wide arbitration is allowed. XIV. i. Deiulemar Campagnia v. While there were others that were not bad. and moving it could lead to the change of that condition. and they were ordered to go. XV. EBS Acquisition ² 2 non parties are seeking suit. ² There was a contract for a ship and had an arbitration agreement in London. Parsons shipping co. They agreed to that. IAP Worldwide Services. to show a critical part of this contract. Contichem v. ² employment agreement that provided for the AAA rules to be evoked. Dispute arose out of the condition of the ship. The arbitrator awarded the defendants via summary adjudication. Held it was improper to have an attachment where the garnishee had not yet r·cd the property. B. Held there was an extraordinary circumstance here in order to allow arbitrators to make this happen. because you can sever out the ugly bad phrases according to the contract. Rosenfeld. F. M/V Allegra ² whether the arbitration was allowed to keep the ship there because of an extraordinary circumstance of them leaving the discovery.XIII. Held you cannot subpoena outside people to do it. The court subpoenaed these 2 non-parties. E. The Court reversed the district court holding that they had to go to arbitration. i. The District Court held that it was unconscionable with regards to the confidentiality provision. including the arbitration agreement. Schlessinger v. i. Green Tree Financial Corp v. and the contract said that there was a confidentiality provision and an award of punitive damages that was unconscionable. D.

Omaha Indemnity Co. A ground for setting aside award is the arbitrator failing to admit material evidence. too indefinite b·c award was lump sum i. b·c the testimony was appropriate. Gov·t of Islamic Rep. delay did not prejudice party ii. Tempo Shain Corp. i. i. Held arbitration award was appropriate. Dev. Co. B. v. C. Berteck. because he didn·t take it in consideration. Change of gov·t in Iran ² believed they didn·t have to honor any k w/US ii. Time limit to render award is a directory limitation not mandatory one. functus officio ² ´the office has performedµ Common Law Doctrine: Page 12 of 15 . Cargill (1989) ² not made in timely manner. of Resources Corp. even though the attny purposefully did this. and held for Tempo. . Berteck then disagreed with the award. of Iran ² attempt to obtain review of merits of award i. ENFORCING ARBITRAL AWARDS A. and circumstances under which an arbitral award may be corrected b·c of erroneous assumption of fact. ii. Held it should be vacated. Gov·t of India v. Whether delaying in issuing an award will vacate an award? No. Issue: When does an arbitrator·s power to decide a case cease? It ceases when the award is issued. former president was unable to testify.XVI. and the dispute was over the compensation. Ask for it at prehearing conference. clerical or typos C. Bowles Financial Group v. 3 things allowed in award review to be made w/in 30 days of award: 1) get interpretation of award. Stifel. There was no itemization b·c they didn·t ask for one ² most will not give itemized award unless parties K for it. and the arbitrators said that they had other evidence of what he was going to say. 2) make additional award as to claims presented in arbitral proceedings but omitted from award. The Arbitrator said that he did not take it in consideration when he gave the award. ² Issue whether second award ´clarifyingµ original award exceeded arbitrators powers. ii. Nicolaus & Co. The appellee here repeatedly. so they couldn·t prove that it was fundamentally unfair. Colonial Penn Ins. cts will not inquire into the basis of the award unless arbitrator rendered in ´manifest disregardµ of the law or unless the facts of the case fail to support it iii.there was arbitration. v. v. Lump sum award ² arbitrator may award lump sum award w/o disclosing their rationale for it. B. ² There was a contract over a patent product. and purposefully gave the arbitrator the other side·s offer of settlement. 3) request for correction of errors in computation. i. Inc.

D. final. . Cts rarely vacate an award on grounds of fraud. iii. Enforcing and Challenging Domestic Arbitration Awards A. Arbitration awards must be upheld even when there has been ´errors . or any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced. and iv. and definite award upon the subject matter submitted was not made. arbitrator has not exhausted his job & may render subsequent determination. Cts may only remand to arbitrators for clarification vi. or so imperfectly executed them that a mutual. or undue means. can only clarify 1st award if a mathematical error occurs XVII. iii. Presumption ² arbitrators took a permissible route to the award C. There is no appeals process except by K. x. ii. iv. Where the arbitrators exceeded their power.in determination of factual issuesµ v. 2) where award does not adjudicate an issue which has been submitted. Where the award was procured by corruption.arbitrator can correct mistake which is apparent on face of his award. . ambiguity arises which arbitrator is entitled to clarify. upon sufficient cause shown. In Domestic Arbitrations arbitrators rarely give reasons for award B. Grounds for Vacating Domestic Arbitration Award i. fraud. 2) Ct not subject to ´evil of outside communication and unilateral influenceµ 3) Ct must necessarily exercise some review of arbitral award when a motion is before it. 3) where award (although seemingly complete) leaves doubt whether the submission has been fully executed. funtus officio ² does not apply where parties have agreed to go back to arbitrator after an award viii. Until final award is made the arbitrator ¶s mandate still continues and not functus officio ix. or in refusing to hear evidence pertinent & material to the controversy. Arbitrators are not allowed to issue subsequent awards. Where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing. Where there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrator(s). only allowed to arbitrate issue they were hired for. corruption of undue means Page 13 of 15 1) . Once made an arbitral award is final & binding vii. Policy reasons for functus officio doctrine precluding arbitration panel from reconsidering award are not applicable to Cts: 1) Ct is not subject to ´isolated activityµ.

fraud or undue mean. Inc. Disqualifying arbiters w/experience in the business would eviscerate the goals of arbitration iv.E. permitting motion either where award was made or in any district proper under the general venue statute i. Edwards & Sons.G. Fraud ² must show 1) not discoverable upon the exercise of due diligence prior to arbitration. illegal and denotes something wrong. G. i. uncertain. Multi-state transaction and where the best place to appeal the award iii.part & parcel of business litigation iv. Undue means ² more than necessary. 2) materially related to an issue in the arbitration. i. One rare exception is Bonar v. v. to do so in k arbitrator cannot do independent investigation XVIII. vacate. or permissive. Harter v. Misconduct on part of arbitrator. according to the standard of morals which the law enforces. Undue means ²on part of arbitrator ii. Cortez Byrd Chips. Offering meritless defense . McCollough ² claimed award procured by corruption. iii. covered in §10 of FAA. Can be done anywhere there was a general venue. just b·c assert frivolous defense does not vacate an award. Issue: Just because an arbitrator has some association w/business doing arbitration does not mean there is evident partiality. Dean Witter ² where expert lied about qualifications. claimed arbitrator refused to hear material evidence. Lisker ² claimed they had a joint venture and Lisker owed G ½ million dollars. Issue: Whether a frivolous defense will set aside an arbitral award? No. not proper. or speculative iii. Bill Harbert ² Whether FAA is restrictive allowing a motion to confirm. Fraud & undue means go hand-in-hand. Held: FAA permissive. v. Ex parte communication w/arbitrator ² if it gives appearance of impropriety that is enough to vacate the award. Arbiters must have expertise in industry sector at issue but must be commercially disinterested in the particular dispute. lack of arbitral stmt of reason. F. Evident partiality exists when an arbitrator·s bias is ´direct. Page 14 of 15 . ii. definite and capable of demonstration rather than remote. H. or modify an award to be brought only in district in which award was made. Iowa Grain ² claimed ´evident partialityµ or corruption in arbitrators i. Unless auth. ii. ii. Inc. A. Dealing with diversity jdx and jdx minimum in enforcing arbitral award A. iii. undue means. and 3) established by clear & convincing evidence. Goldfinger v.

held that a union may waive the individual employee's right to a judicial forum for the litigation of a federal age discrimination claim. Pyett . 14 Penn Plaza v. v. Mattel ² Only standard of review for Arbitration awards is §10 of FAA.If have collective bargaining K ² it can waive rights. Page 15 of 15 . XX. Hall Street Assoc.XIX.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful