Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 682.13 (2025)
Vacating an award.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
682.13 Vacating an award.—
(1) Upon motion of a party to an arbitration proceeding, the court shall vacate an arbitration award if:
(a) The award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means;
(b) There was:
1. Evident partiality by an arbitrator appointed as a neutral arbitrator;
2. Corruption by an arbitrator; or
3. Misconduct by an arbitrator prejudicing the rights of a party to the arbitration proceeding;
(c) An arbitrator refused to postpone the hearing upon showing of sufficient cause for postponement, refused to hear evidence material to the controversy, or otherwise conducted the hearing contrary to s. 682.06, so as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party to the arbitration proceeding;
(d) An arbitrator exceeded the arbitrator’s powers;
(e) There was no agreement to arbitrate, unless the person participated in the arbitration proceeding without raising the objection under s. 682.06(3) not later than the beginning of the arbitration hearing; or
(f) The arbitration was conducted without proper notice of the initiation of an arbitration as required in s. 682.032 so as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party to the arbitration proceeding.
(2) A motion under this section must be filed within 90 days after the movant receives notice of the award pursuant to s. 682.09 or within 90 days after the movant receives notice of a modified or corrected award pursuant to s. 682.10, unless the movant alleges that the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means, in which case the motion must be made within 90 days after the ground is known or by the exercise of reasonable care would have been known by the movant.
(3) If the court vacates an award on a ground other than that set forth in paragraph (1)(e), it may order a rehearing. If the award is vacated on a ground stated in paragraph (1)(a) or paragraph (1)(b), the rehearing must be before a new arbitrator. If the award is vacated on a ground stated in paragraph (1)(c), paragraph (1)(d), or paragraph (1)(f), the rehearing may be before the arbitrator who made the award or the arbitrator’s successor. The arbitrator must render the decision in the rehearing within the same time as that provided in s. 682.09(2) for an award.
(4) If a motion to vacate is denied and no motion to modify or correct the award is pending, the court shall confirm the award.
Note.—Former s. 57.22.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 208
cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1969–2025 · leading case: Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Florida, Inc. v. Jupiter Med. Ctr., 154 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 2014).
Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Florida, Inc. v. Jupiter Med. Ctr., 154 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 2014). “This Court held that “in the absence of one of the five factors set forth in [section 682.13], neither a trial court nor a district court of appeal has the authority to overturn the award” despite the arbitrator’s erroneous interpretation of the statutes governing sales tax…”
Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989). “Nonetheless, the district court held that both the trial court and the arbitrator had misapplied section 212.031, and therefore reversed as a matter of law.”
Toiberman v. Tisera, 998 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). “03 and unless the party participated in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection. *13 But the fact that the relief was such that it could not or would not be granted by a court of law or equity is not ground for vacating or refusing to confirm the award.”
Commc'ns Workers v. Sch. Bd., 888 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). “" Fla. Stat. § 682.13 (1)(c). "[A]n arbitrator exceeds his or her power [ ] when he or she goes beyond the authority granted by the parties or the operative documents and decides an issue not pertinent to the resolution of the issue submitted to arbitration.”
Davenport v. Dimitrijevic, 857 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). “A court may not set aside an arbitration award except upon those grounds set forth in section 682.13(1), Florida Statutes (2002).”
Jaylene, Inc. v. Steuer Ex Rel. Paradise, 22 So. 3d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). “Section 682.13, Florida Statutes (2008), authorizes a narrow list of grounds for vacating an arbitration award.”
Felger v. Mock, 65 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). “06 (regarding notice and entitlement to present evidence); or (e) there was no agreement or provision for arbitration. In the absence of one of these five factors, neither the trial court nor this court has the authority to overturn the arbitration award.”
Lake City Fire & Rescue Ass'n, etc. v. City of Lake City, Florida, 240 So. 3d 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “The effect of the final judgment was that the firefighter’s termination was upheld.”
RDC Golf of Florida I, Inc. v. Apostolicas, 925 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). “To vacate an arbitration award, a party must establish one of the five statutory grounds set forth in section 682.13(1)(a)-(e), Florida Statutes (2004).”
Wells v. Castro, 117 So. 3d 1233 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). “Motions to vacate an arbitration award are made pursuant to section 682.13, Florida Statutes (2012), 1 and motions to modify or correct an award are made pursuant to section 682.”
State Dep't of Ins. v. First Floridian Auto & Home Ins., 803 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “Concluding that the Department failed to allege facts that would justify vacating the arbitration award under section 682.13, Florida Statutes (1999), we affirm.”
Nash v. Florida Atl. Univ. Bd. of Trs., 213 So. 3d 363 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). “Whether an arbitrator exceeded his authority within the meaning of section 682.13, Florida Statutes, is an issue of law subject to de novo review.”
— 682.13(1) — 56 cases
Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Florida, Inc. v. Jupiter Med. Ctr., 154 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 2014). “This Court held that “in the absence of one of the five factors set forth in [section 682.13], neither a trial court nor a district court of appeal has the authority to overturn the award” despite the arbitrator’s erroneous interpretation of the statutes governing sales tax…”
Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989). “Nonetheless, the district court held that both the trial court and the arbitrator had misapplied section 212.031, and therefore reversed as a matter of law.”
Toiberman v. Tisera, 998 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). “03 and unless the party participated in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection. *13 But the fact that the relief was such that it could not or would not be granted by a court of law or equity is not ground for vacating or refusing to confirm the award.”
Felger v. Mock, 65 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). “06 (regarding notice and entitlement to present evidence); or (e) there was no agreement or provision for arbitration. In the absence of one of these five factors, neither the trial court nor this court has the authority to overturn the arbitration award.”
Jaylene, Inc. v. Steuer Ex Rel. Paradise, 22 So. 3d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). “Section 682.13, Florida Statutes (2008), authorizes a narrow list of grounds for vacating an arbitration award.”
— 682.13(1)(a) — 16 cases
Davenport v. Dimitrijevic, 857 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). “A court may not set aside an arbitration award except upon those grounds set forth in section 682.13(1), Florida Statutes (2002).”
Bland v. Health Care & Ret. Corp., 927 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).
Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989). “Nonetheless, the district court held that both the trial court and the arbitrator had misapplied section 212.031, and therefore reversed as a matter of law.”
LeNeve v. via South Florida, LLC, 908 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
Sorren v. Kumble, 578 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
— 682.13(1)(b) — 13 cases
RDC Golf of Florida I, Inc. v. Apostolicas, 925 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). “To vacate an arbitration award, a party must establish one of the five statutory grounds set forth in section 682.13(1)(a)-(e), Florida Statutes (2004).”
BDO Seidman, LLP v. Bee, 970 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
Int'l Med. Centers v. Sabates, 498 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
Deen v. Oster, 814 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
Lee v. Marcus, 396 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
— 682.13(1)(b)(3) — 1 case
— 682.13(1)(c) — 33 cases
Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989). “Nonetheless, the district court held that both the trial court and the arbitrator had misapplied section 212.031, and therefore reversed as a matter of law.”
Commc'ns Workers v. Sch. Bd., 888 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). “" Fla. Stat. § 682.13 (1)(c). "[A]n arbitrator exceeds his or her power [ ] when he or she goes beyond the authority granted by the parties or the operative documents and decides an issue not pertinent to the resolution of the issue submitted to arbitration.”
Della Penna v. Zabawa, 931 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).
Toiberman v. Tisera, 998 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). “03 and unless the party participated in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection. *13 But the fact that the relief was such that it could not or would not be granted by a court of law or equity is not ground for vacating or refusing to confirm the award.”
Applewhite v. Sheen Fin. Resources, 608 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
— 682.13(1)(d) — 19 cases
Lake City Fire & Rescue Ass'n, etc. v. City of Lake City, Florida, 240 So. 3d 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). “The effect of the final judgment was that the firefighter’s termination was upheld.”
City of Miami v. Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 20, 248 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).
Zac Smith & Co. v. Moonspinner Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 534 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
Lee v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 594 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
Murton Roofing Corp. v. FF Fund Corp., 930 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006).
— 682.13(1)(e) — 12 cases
Commc'ns Workers v. Sch. Bd., 888 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). “" Fla. Stat. § 682.13 (1)(c). "[A]n arbitrator exceeds his or her power [ ] when he or she goes beyond the authority granted by the parties or the operative documents and decides an issue not pertinent to the resolution of the issue submitted to arbitration.”
Koch v. Waller & Co., Inc., 439 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989). “Nonetheless, the district court held that both the trial court and the arbitrator had misapplied section 212.031, and therefore reversed as a matter of law.”
Applewhite v. Sheen Fin. Resources, 608 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
VERZURA CONST. v. Surfside Ocean, Inc., 708 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).
— 682.13(10) — 1 case
Vill. at Dolphin Com. Ctr., LLC v. Constr. Serv. Solutions, LLC, 143 So. 3d 942 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
— 682.13(2) — 15 cases
Toiberman v. Tisera, 998 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). “03 and unless the party participated in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection. *13 But the fact that the relief was such that it could not or would not be granted by a court of law or equity is not ground for vacating or refusing to confirm the award.”
Kendall Imports, LLC v. Diaz, 215 So. 3d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, Local Union No. 323 v. Coral Elec. Corp., 576 F. Supp. 1128 (S.D. Fla. 1984).
Israel v. Costanzo, 216 So. 3d 644 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
IUBAC Local Union No. 31 v. Anastasi Bros. Corp., 600 F. Supp. 92 (S.D. Fla. 1984).
— 682.13(3) — 9 cases
Barr v. Florida Bd. of Regents, 644 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Zac Smith & Co. v. Moonspinner Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 534 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
Felger v. Mock, 65 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). “06 (regarding notice and entitlement to present evidence); or (e) there was no agreement or provision for arbitration. In the absence of one of these five factors, neither the trial court nor this court has the authority to overturn the arbitration award.”
Deen v. Oster, 814 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
Fridman v. Citicorp Real Est., Inc., 596 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
— 682.13(4) — 5 cases
City of Tallahassee v. Big Bend PBA, 703 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
Dairyland Ins. Co. v. Hudnall, 279 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973).
Haskell v. Forest Land & Timber Co., 408 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Michael Fisten v. Julie Brown (Fla. 3d DCA 2024).
DAS Health Ventures, Inc. v. Advanced Physicians, S.C. (M.D. Fla. 2021).
— 682.13(a) — 1 case
Ray v. Longhi (M.D. Fla. 2021).
— 682.13(b) — 2 cases
Boyhan v. Maguire, 693 So. 2d 659 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).
Vihlen Bros. Gen. Contractors v. Beltran, 47 Fla. Supp. 2d 195 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1991).
— 682.13(c) — 5 cases
Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Florida, Inc. v. Jupiter Med. Ctr., 154 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 2014). “This Court held that “in the absence of one of the five factors set forth in [section 682.13], neither a trial court nor a district court of appeal has the authority to overturn the award” despite the arbitrator’s erroneous interpretation of the statutes governing sales tax…”
Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Wood, 676 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
Robert W. Baird & Co. v. Sunamerica Sec., Inc., 399 F. Supp. 2d 1314 (M.D. Fla. 2005).
Corpion v. Jenne, 869 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
— 682.13(e) — 1 case
Expressway Companies v. Precision Design, Inc., 882 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004).
— 682.13(e)(3) — 1 case
Affiliated Mktg., Inc. v. Dyco Chem. & Coatings, Inc., 340 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).
— 682.13(l) — 1 case
City of Tallahassee v. Big Bend Police Benevolent Ass'n, 710 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
— 682.13(l)(a) — 3 cases
Regalado v. Cabezas, 959 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).
Manorcare Health Servs., Inc. v. Stiehl, 22 So. 3d 96 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).
Alterman v. Martin-Busutil, 716 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
— 682.13(l)(b) — 4 cases
Heart Surgery Ctr. v. Bixler, 128 So. 3d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
Publix Supermarkets, Inc. v. Faith Conte, as Pers. Rep. of the Est. of Susan L. Moore, 169 So. 3d 1265 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015).
Brandon Jones Sandall Zeide Kohn Chalal & Musso, P.A. v. Beasley & Hauser, P.A., 925 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).
Yanakakis v. Pacre Corp. (In re Pacre Corp.), 21 B.R. 759 (Bankr. S.D. Florida 1982).
— 682.13(l)(c) — 21 cases
Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Florida, Inc. v. Jupiter Med. Ctr., 154 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 2014). “This Court held that “in the absence of one of the five factors set forth in [section 682.13], neither a trial court nor a district court of appeal has the authority to overturn the award” despite the arbitrator’s erroneous interpretation of the statutes governing sales tax…”
Felger v. Mock, 65 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). “06 (regarding notice and entitlement to present evidence); or (e) there was no agreement or provision for arbitration. In the absence of one of these five factors, neither the trial court nor this court has the authority to overturn the arbitration award.”
Heart Surgery Ctr. v. Bixler, 128 So. 3d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
Jaylene, Inc. v. Steuer Ex Rel. Paradise, 22 So. 3d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). “Section 682.13, Florida Statutes (2008), authorizes a narrow list of grounds for vacating an arbitration award.”
Simmons v. City of Avon Park, 788 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
— 682.13(l)(d) — 7 cases
Talel Corp. v. Shimonovitch, 84 So. 3d 1192 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).
Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Florida, Inc. v. Jupiter Med. Ctr., 154 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 2014). “This Court held that “in the absence of one of the five factors set forth in [section 682.13], neither a trial court nor a district court of appeal has the authority to overturn the award” despite the arbitrator’s erroneous interpretation of the statutes governing sales tax…”
Nash v. Florida Atl. Univ. Bd. of Trs., 213 So. 3d 363 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). “Whether an arbitrator exceeded his authority within the meaning of section 682.13, Florida Statutes, is an issue of law subject to de novo review.”
State Dep't of Ins. v. First Floridian Auto & Home Ins., 803 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “Concluding that the Department failed to allege facts that would justify vacating the arbitration award under section 682.13, Florida Statutes (1999), we affirm.”
Laquer v. Falcone, 165 So. 3d 19 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).
— 682.13(l)(e) — 3 cases
Nucci v. Storm Football Partners, 82 So. 3d 180 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012).
Regalado v. Cabezas, 959 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).
Byars v. Thomas, 939 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.