SW Legal Educational Publishing

Judicial Review of Arbitration Allowed When Contract Permits Review for Errors of Law
Description Appeals court allowed judicial review in case in which contract required arbitration but specified that review of award was allowed for errors of fact or law.
Topic Alternate Dispute Resolution
Key Words Contracts, Federal Arbitration Act
C A S E   S U M M A R Y
Facts Kyocera produced computer disk drives for LaPine according to LaPine's design. Because of a dispute, the contract went to a three arbitrator panel, in accordance with the Rules of the International Chamber of Commerce which awarded LaPine a huge judgment. Kyocera appealed the award to federal court.
District Court Decision Motion to vacate arbitrators' decision denied. The court held there were no grounds in the FAA that would permit review. Kyocera appealed.
Court of Appeals Decision Reversed. The contract allowed "judicial scrutiny of the arbitrators' award when they agreed that review would be for errors of fact or law." The parties did not waive their rights to judicial review of an arbitration award when they agreed by contract to arbitrate. In such a contract, the parties expand judicial review of arbitration beyond the grounds set forth in the FAA.
Citation LaPine Technology v. Kyocera, ---F.3d--- (1997 WL 755261, 9th Cir.)
or
139 F. 3d 884 (8th Cir., 1997)

Back to Alternate Dispute Resolution Listings

©1997-2000  South-Western, a division of Cengage Learning, Inc. Cengage Learning is a trademark used herein under license.