Mitchell v. Katz, 531 U.S. 878 (2000). · Go Syfert
Mitchell v. Katz, 531 U.S. 878 (2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“it is well-established that courts should play only a limited role in reviewing the decisions of arbitrators.”
11 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: General Elec. Co. v. Anson Stamping Co. Inc. (kywd, 2006-03-30)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) General Elec. Co. v. Anson Stamping Co. Inc.
W.D. Ky. · 2006 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
it is well-established that courts should play only a limited role in reviewing the decisions of arbitrators.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." LILLIAN PEBBLES MORRISON v. CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC., MARK F. SHANKLE, SR. v. PEP BOYS — MANNY, MOE & JACK, INC. (2×)
6th Cir. · 2003 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Dawahare v. Spencer, 210 F.3d 666, 669 (6th Cir.) (noting the “manifest disregard of the law” standard of review for arbitration awards and also noting that review is made even more difficult where arbitrators do not explain their decisions), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 878 , 121 S.Ct. 187 , 148 L.Ed.2d 130 (2000); Glennon v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 83 F.3d 132, 136 (6th Cir.1996) (discussing the standard for vacating an arbitration award based on “manifest disregard of the law” standard).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mitchell
v.
Katz
No. 00-153.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 2, 2000.
531 U.S. 878

C. A. 1st Cir. Certio-rari denied.