[Hat tip to our blog contributor Peter S. Vogel] The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that an arbitrator did not act with manifest disregard of the law when he turned to extrinsic evidence to determine the parties’ intent. The court also granted sanctions to compensate the company for unnecessary legal fees incurred when the other party appealed the arbitral award. I. Background In DMA Int’l, Inc. v. Qwest Com

Continue reading...

As the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decides more “manifest disregard” of the law cases, we thought that you might be interested in reading our guest-post published at the Loree Reinsurance and Arbitration Law Forum earlier this year. Check it out! Hall Street Meets S. Maestri Place: What Standards of Review will the Fifth Circuit Apply to Arbitration Awards Under FAA Section 10(a)(4) after Citigroup? By Victori

Continue reading...

In United Forming, Inc. v. Faulknerusa, LP, No. 09-50073 (5th Cir. Oct. 27, 2009), FaulknerUSA, LP (Faulkner) is the general contractor at a construction project; United Forming, Inc. (United) is a sub-contractor; and Continental Casualty, Co. (Continental) is the surety of their agreement. After a dispute over United’s work, the parties submitted their claims to arbitration before an American Arbitration Association (AAA) panel. The panel

Continue reading...

Over the past year, the circuit courts have differed over whether the “manifest disregard of the law” doctrine survives the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Hall Street. Hall Street Assoc. v. Mattel, Inc., 128 S. Ct. 1396 (2008). In a recent article, Philip J. Loree Jr. analyzes the Second Circuit’s interpretation of Hall Street in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 548 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2008). Interestingly, the

Continue reading...

This week, a Court of Appeals for the State of Wisconsin decided Sands v. Menard, Inc., No. 2008AP1703, 2009 WI App 70. Sands is a former general counsel for Menard, Inc. Her employment was terminated following a dispute over compensation. Pursuant to a mandatory arbitration agreement, Sands submitted her claims to an arbitration panel. The panel found that Menard violated the Equal Pay Act by paying Sands less than a male employee and also found

Continue reading...