Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 572B.23 (2026)

Vacating Award

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Upon motion of a party to the arbitration proceeding, the court shall vacate an award if:

(1) the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means;

(2) there was:

(A) evident partiality by an arbitrator appointed as a neutral;

(B) corruption by an arbitrator; or

(C) misconduct by an arbitrator prejudicing the rights of a party to the arbitration proceeding;

(3) an arbitrator refused to postpone the hearing upon showing of sufficient cause for postponement, refused to consider evidence material to the controversy, or otherwise conducted the hearing contrary to section 572B.15, so as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party to the arbitration proceeding;

(4) an arbitrator exceeded the arbitrator's powers;

(5) there was no agreement to arbitrate, unless the person participated in the arbitration proceeding without raising the objection under section 572B.15, subsection (c), not later than the commencement of the arbitration hearing; or

(6) the arbitration was conducted without proper notice of the initiation of an arbitration as required in section 572B.09 so as to prejudice substantially the rights of a party to the arbitration proceeding.

(b) A motion under this section must be filed within 90 days after the movant receives notice of the award in a record pursuant to section 572B.19 or within 90 days after the movant receives notice of an arbitrator's award in a record on a motion to modify or correct an award pursuant to section 572B.20, unless the motion is predicated upon the ground that the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means, in which case it must be filed within 90 days after such a ground is known or by the exercise of reasonable care should have been known by the movant.

(c) In vacating an award on a ground other than that set forth in subsection (a)(5), the court may order a rehearing before a new arbitrator. If the award is vacated on the ground stated in subsection (a)(3), (4), or (6), the court may order a rehearing 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 section 572B.19, subsection (b), for an award.

(d) If a motion to vacate an award is denied and a motion to modify or correct the award is not pending, the court shall confirm the award.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case: Trout Brook South Condo. Ass'n v. Harleysville Worcester Ins., 995 F. Supp. 2d 1035 (D. Minnesota 2014).
Trout Brook South Condo. Ass'n v. Harleysville Worcester Ins., 995 F. Supp. 2d 1035 (D. Minnesota 2014). · cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 572B.23(d). . State law governs the interpretation of insurance policies, Nat’l Union Fire Ins.”
W. Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Nguyen, 902 N.W.2d 645 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “See Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(4) .(2016) (directing Minnesota courts to vacate arbitration award when arbitrator exceeds the arbitrator’s powers).”
Creekwood Rental Town-Homes, LLC v. Kiln Underwriting Ltd., 11 F. Supp. 3d 909 (D. Minnesota 2014). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. §§ 572B.23, 572B.24. . Although only the 2011 rental agreements between Creekwood and tenants of the Property appear in the record, Kiln has presented no evidence disputing Lewandowski’s deposition testimony that Creekwood executed lease agreements at the Property…”
Carmen Schroeder v. W. Nat'l Mut. Ins. Co., 850 N.W.2d 712 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Western National moved the district court under Minn.Stat. § 572B.23 (2012) to vacate the no-fault arbitration award on the ground that the arbitrator misapplied the law in awarding benefits for services that were not replaced and therefore had exceeded his authority.”
Rocon, Inc. v. EDR Ltd. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 12× “See Minn. Stat. § 572B.23. Therefore, we cannot consider the arguments.”
City of Richfield v. Law Enf't Labor Servs., Inc., 923 N.W.2d 36 (Minn. 2019). · cites it 2× “See Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a) (2018) (laying out the narrow rules for judicial vacation of an arbitration award).”
Minnesota Nurses Ass'n v. North Mem'l Health Care, 822 F.3d 414 (8th Cir. 2016). “Minn.Stat. §§ 572B.23, .24. North Memorial removed the case to federal district court, noting the arbitration was conducted pursuant to the CBA, thereby conferring federal jurisdiction under the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA).”
Fern Hill Place Retail Ass'n, Inc. v. Fern Hill Place Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 7× “Under these circumstances, even if the settlement agreement amended the declaration, the arbitrator did not exceed his power by confirming the validity and enforceability of the settlement agreement.”
Savanna Grove Coach Homeowners' Ass'n v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co. (D. Minnesota 2020). · cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 572B.23, subd. (b). Savanna Grove points out that Auto- Owners filed no motion to vacate the appraisal award and, citing § 572B.”
Bjorklund Companies, LLC v. Auto-Owners Ins. (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(3) (2014). The party seeking to vacate the appraisal award bears the burden of proving that the appraisal panel exceeded its powers.”
Ruth Unger v. AAA Ins. Co. (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “An arbitration award may be vacated for “evident partiality by an arbitrator,” when an arbitrator exceeds its powers, or where there was no agreement to arbitrate. Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a); see also 2010 Minn.”
Jay Nygard v. Patrick Walsh (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “Nygards then moved the district court to vacate the arbitration award under Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(2)(A) (2014), due to the “evident partiality” of the arbitrator.”
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a) — 2 cases
City of Richfield v. Law Enf't Labor Servs., Inc., 923 N.W.2d 36 (Minn. 2019). “See Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a) (2018) (laying out the narrow rules for judicial vacation of an arbitration award).”
Ruth Unger v. AAA Ins. Co. (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). “An arbitration award may be vacated for “evident partiality by an arbitrator,” when an arbitrator exceeds its powers, or where there was no agreement to arbitrate. Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a); see also 2010 Minn.”
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(2)(A) — 2 cases
Jay Nygard v. Patrick Walsh (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). “Nygards then moved the district court to vacate the arbitration award under Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(2)(A) (2014), due to the “evident partiality” of the arbitrator.”
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(3) — 1 case
Bjorklund Companies, LLC v. Auto-Owners Ins. (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). “Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(3) (2014). The party seeking to vacate the appraisal award bears the burden of proving that the appraisal panel exceeded its powers.”
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(4) — 3 cases
W. Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Nguyen, 902 N.W.2d 645 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017). “See Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(4) .(2016) (directing Minnesota courts to vacate arbitration award when arbitrator exceeds the arbitrator’s powers).”
Fern Hill Place Retail Ass'n, Inc. v. Fern Hill Place Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). “Under these circumstances, even if the settlement agreement amended the declaration, the arbitrator did not exceed his power by confirming the validity and enforceability of the settlement agreement.”
AAA Ins. Co. v. Nicole Christophersen (Minn. Ct. App. 2026).
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(5) — 1 case
Fern Hill Place Retail Ass'n, Inc. v. Fern Hill Place Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). “Under these circumstances, even if the settlement agreement amended the declaration, the arbitrator did not exceed his power by confirming the validity and enforceability of the settlement agreement.”
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(6) — 1 case
Fern Hill Place Retail Ass'n, Inc. v. Fern Hill Place Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). “Under these circumstances, even if the settlement agreement amended the declaration, the arbitrator did not exceed his power by confirming the validity and enforceability of the settlement agreement.”
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(b) — 1 case
Rocon, Inc. v. EDR Ltd. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Minn. Stat. § 572B.23. Therefore, we cannot consider the arguments.”
— Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(d) — 3 cases
Trout Brook South Condo. Ass'n v. Harleysville Worcester Ins., 995 F. Supp. 2d 1035 (D. Minnesota 2014). “” Minn.Stat. § 572B.23(d). . State law governs the interpretation of insurance policies, Nat’l Union Fire Ins.”
Rocon, Inc. v. EDR Ltd. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). “See Minn. Stat. § 572B.23. Therefore, we cannot consider the arguments.”
Jay Nygard v. Patrick Walsh (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). “Nygards then moved the district court to vacate the arbitration award under Minn. Stat. § 572B.23(a)(2)(A) (2014), due to the “evident partiality” of the arbitrator.”
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.