Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
“Three strikes and you’re out � sort of.” That’s what a California court has basically told a party that asked the court to overturn an arbitrator’s award. Consistent with three prior rulings by the California Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, the Second District Court of Appeal has recently held that a court will not vacate an award on the ground the arbitrator made an error of law. Baize v. Eastridge Companies, 142 Cal.App.4th 293 (Aug. 25, 2006). But the court, in a curious twist, unsettled the well-settled by asserting that the question was “an open one” � on the strange theory that another lower court decision had called into question a 1992 California Supreme Court holding on the issue. The Baizeruling lent further encouragement to persistent post-arbitration challengers by refusing to award fees against appellant Eastridge Companies. Notwithstanding the three decisions, which Baizeitself held to “control the result,” the Baizecourt held that the Supreme Court had “not conclusively resolved” the reviewability of arbitration awards and stated the issue “may be ripe for Supreme Court reconsideration.” The upshot? The finality of arbitration decisions � black-letter law under the Uniform Arbitration Act � may have become something of an open issue in California. The appellant in Baizehas accepted the Court of Appeal’s tacit invitation to seek Supreme Court review, raising the issues, among others, of what contractual language may be sufficient to invoke judicial review of an arbitrator’s legal conclusions and severability of purported judicial review provisions in the event they were held void. The petition for review is pending. In the 1992 case, Moncharsh v. Heily& Blase, 3 Cal.4th, the California Supreme Court exhaustively examined judicial review of arbitration decisions in a 33-page opinion that traced the evolution of case law on the subject over a span of 140 years. The court’s key conclusions:

This content has been archived.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 Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

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]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.