Alternative Dispute Resolution,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Oct. 23, 2019
Dissenting judge says decision means many arbitrations awards may be vacated
In her dissent, 9th US. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Michelle Friedland argued the appellants should have known ADR firms inherently favor repeat customers and overturning the award would lead to an avalanche of similar appeals.
Scores of arbitration awards might be vacated as a result of a federal panel ruling Tuesday to wipe out an award due to an arbitrator's alleged failure to properly disclose repeat business or the fact he had an ownership stake in his ADR firm, a dissenting appellate judge said.
In her dissent, 9th US. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Michelle Friedland argued the appellants...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
Arbitration
Monster Energy v. City Beverages
Vacatur of an arbitration award is supported where the arbitrator fails to disclose to the parties any dealings with an involved party that might create an impression of possible bias.