The biggest development in arbitration in 2012 may be what failed to develop in the continuing debate over how much disclosure by a potential arbitrator is enough to avoid a post-arbitration claim of evident partiality.
Appellate opinions discussing this issue tend to be decided on a case-by-case, fact-intensive basis; however, a few guiding principles seem obvious. The 5th Court of Appeals in Dallas’ decision in Karlseng v. Cook (2011)appeared to open the door to post-arbitration litigation on a large scale, but the 5th Court soon narrowed that opening in its 2012 holding in Ponderosa Pine Energy v. Tenaska Energy Inc. Now, a challenger’s zeal should be tempered so long as some disclosure enough to put a party on notice is made.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
