Alternative dispute resolution

One of the main benefits of arbitration is early finality. Even an adverse decision in arbitration may be preferable to the high costs and uncertainty involved in the process of litigation and appeal and relitigation after remand. The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) codified the policy of finality by...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The IP Litigator : Devoted to Intellectual Property Litigation and Enforcement 2007-09, Vol.13 (5), p.41
Main Author: Skaff, Stephanie
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agreements
Alternative dispute resolution
Arbitration
Commercial arbitration agreements
Disputes
District courts
Drinking water
Federal court decisions
Federal legislation
Judicial reviews
Laws, regulations and rules
Majority rule
State court decisions
Water quality
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:One of the main benefits of arbitration is early finality. Even an adverse decision in arbitration may be preferable to the high costs and uncertainty involved in the process of litigation and appeal and relitigation after remand. The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) codified the policy of finality by specifying very limited grounds for rejecting an arbitrator's award. Under the majority rule, the FAA sets out a substantive rule applicable in state as well as federal courts, but its rule is simply that courts must enforce the terms of private arbitration agreements. A recent case has brought the problem of legal review of arbitration decisions into high focus. Hall Street Associates owned an industrial building in Portland, OR, which it leased to the toymaker Mattel. Hall Street sued Mattel in state court, seeking damages and declaratory and injunctive relief Mattel removed to federal court on diversity grounds.
ISSN:1086-914X