Vacatur Of Arbitration Awards For Evident Partiality

This article–by Blaine Green and Dustin Chase-Woods of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP and published in JD Supra–discussing the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Monster Energy Co. v. City Beverages, LLC, in which the U.S. Supreme Court recently denied certiorari, sets the stage as follows: “In Monster Energy, the Ninth Circuit broadly interpreted the Federal Arbitration Act’s “evident partiality” standard for vacating arbitration awards, finding that the arbitrator’s failure to disclose a partial ownership interest in the arbitration provider (JAMS), combined with the fact that JAMS had administered 97 arbitrations for Monster in the preceding five years, created an impression of bias and partiality that required the award be vacated.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s