« Arbitration Lesson #8 - What claims are covered? | Main | National Arbitration Forum's ADR Law & Policy Update »
"Manifest disregard for the law" case could go to Supreme Court
August 17, 2006 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo
Back in March I spotted a 4th Circuit case - Patten v. Signator Insurance Agency - that I said was "clearly wrong."
Perhaps the US Supreme Court can fix it. There's a petition for certiorari pending.
Here is the list of "QUESTIONS PRESENTED" by the petition:
1. Whether (in conflict with the decisions of ten other federal courts of appeals) a court may vacate an arbitrator’s award for “manifest disregard of the law” on the ground that the arbitrator construed an “unambiguous” contract in a way that is “not reasonable”?
2. Whether (in conflict with the decisions of at least eight other federal courts of appeals) a court may vacate an arbitrator’s award for not “drawing its essence from the agreement” on the ground that the arbitrator construed an “unambiguous” contract in a way that is “not reasonable”?
3. Whether (in conflict with the decision of at least one other federal court of appeals) an arbitrator’s award may be vacated on the ground that it does not “draw its essence from the agreement,” even though the award was rendered under a private agreement subject to the Federal Arbitration Act rather than a collective bargaining agreement governed by the Labor- Management Relations Act?
4. Whether an arbitral award may be vacated on nonstatutory, merits-based grounds – such as that the arbitrator manifestly disregarded the law or that the award did not draw its essence from the agreement – despite the explicit requirement of 9 U.S.C. § 9 that a court “must” confirm an arbitral award unless the award is vacated or corrected as provided in 9 U.S.C. §§ 10 and 11?
(I first learned about this from Workplace Profs Blog - Cert Request Challenges Manifest Disregard Standard for Reviewing Arbitration Awards.)
EEOC | NLRB | Supreme Court | Employment Law Blog | Arbitration Blog | Employment Law 101
