U.S. Supreme Court,
Civil Litigation,
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Jul. 1, 2020
Supreme Court lets stand ruling vacating arbitrator’s award
The possibility that a part-owner might cater to one of the company’s frequent clients was the grounds for the circuit majority’s decision he should have disclosed that financial interest.
In a decision some fear might lead to more arbitration award challenges, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling vacating an award by a JAMS arbitrator who failed to disclose his ownership interest in the firm.
JAMS had handled 97 matters over five years for the company that received the award. The possibility an owner might cater to one of the company's frequent clients was the grounds for the c...
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.
