utah_court_cases:arbitration_agreements:ahhmigo_v._synergy_2022
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
|
utah_court_cases:arbitration_agreements:ahhmigo_v._synergy_2022 [2023/05/02 13:45] admin created |
utah_court_cases:arbitration_agreements:ahhmigo_v._synergy_2022 [2023/05/02 16:30] (current) admin |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{ : | {{ : | ||
| + | |||
| + | Excellent case discussing whether an arbitration award can be vacated because the arbitrator exhibited a “manifest disregard for the law.” | ||
| + | General conclusion: | ||
| + | Parties agree to terms of arbitration. An arbitrator complying with those terms (even if the terms may run counter to accepted law) does not therefore manifest disregard of the law. | ||
| + | So long as the arbitrator gives what the parties agreed to, that’s the end of the matter. | ||
| + | |||
utah_court_cases/arbitration_agreements/ahhmigo_v._synergy_2022.1683035139.txt.gz · Last modified: 2023/05/02 13:45 by admin