T IS A BASIC TENET of arbitration jurisprudence that arbitration is a creature of contract and that parties are free to include in their arbitration clause the particulars of their arbitration. It is also well known that the courts give great deference to arbitral awards and that it is a formidable task to convince a court to overturn an award. These two policies collide head on when parties seek to liberalize the standards called for by statute and provide in their arbitration clause that either side can appeal an award on the grounds that it is not supported by the evidence or is contrary to law.
What is a court to do when called on to review an award rendered in an arbitration brought pursuant to such a clause? A number of circuit court decisions have addressed this issue, most recently in the 2001 cases of Bowen v. Amoco Pipeline Co.[1]� and Roadway Package Systems, Inc. v. Kayser.[2]� Those holdings will be addressed below, but first, some background is in order.
