Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Courts Have The Final Say: Does The Doctrine Of Manifest Disregard Promote Lawful Arbitral Awards Or Disguise Unlawful Judicial Review, Lindsay Biesterfeld
Courts Have The Final Say: Does The Doctrine Of Manifest Disregard Promote Lawful Arbitral Awards Or Disguise Unlawful Judicial Review, Lindsay Biesterfeld
Journal of Dispute Resolution
In exchange for a speedy, economical dispute resolution process, parties that submit to binding arbitration assume the risk that an arbitrator might misapply the law. United States Supreme Court precedent and federal law favor agreements to arbitrate by limiting judicial review of arbitral awards and requiring courts to "rigorously enforce arbitration agreements." These judicial constraints support the arbitral goals of efficiency and finality by reducing the risk that arbitral awards will be vacated on appeal. To balance the risk that arbitrators may abuse this standard of review, courts have supplemented restricted judicial review with a doctrine that allows an arbitral …
Whose Finding Is It Anyway: The Division Of Labor Between Courts And Arbitrators With Respect To Waiver, David Lefevre
Whose Finding Is It Anyway: The Division Of Labor Between Courts And Arbitrators With Respect To Waiver, David Lefevre
Journal of Dispute Resolution
Given the emphasis with which the Supreme Court has made clear its policy favoring arbitration, it is not surprising that some courts may have reacted by divesting themselves of a "gateway issue" long decided by courts. Traditionally, courts have determined whether a party has acted inconsistently with its right to arbitration, thereby waiving it, but a few courts found that the question is properly before an arbitrator. Recently, the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Marie v. Allied Home Mortgage Corporation2 established a framework through which the federal circuits may begin to close the potential split of authority regarding waiver …