LawMemo       First in Employment Law 

LawMemo's reason for being: We publish Employment Law Memo - summaries of latest court decisions, one-click links to full text, three emails per week.   Try it. 

Home | Free Trial | Products & Prices | Feeds | Caselaw Database | Sample   
EEOC
| NLRB | Nat'l Arbitration Ctr | Supreme Court | Articles | Lawyers
Employment Law BlogArbitration Blog | Employment Law 101    
Employment Law Memo | NLRB Law Memo | Arbitration Law Memo

Quick Jump: 

LawMemo Arbitration Blog 

All Archives    |    All Archives By Topic

 

« 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.)

LawMemo.Com

Google
 
Web www.LawMemo.com 
This form will search the LawMemo web site. It does not include the Caselaw Database.

Editor: Ross Runkel, Professor of Law Emeritus. email Ross@LawMemo.Com, Phone 503-399-8028. Copyright LawMemo, Inc.

  • Employment Law Memo emails designed for lawyers. 
  • Expert summaries of decisions from all federal and state appellate courts. 
  • Direct link to full text. 
  • Click here for free 4-week subscription