Advest, Inc. v. Patrick McCarthy

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a federal court should vacate an arbi-tral award “where it is clear from the record that the arbitrator recognized the applicable law — and then ignored it”
• ALJ’s discussion of a claimant’s daily activities, 10 which the ALJ did not specifically link to a conclusion that the claimant lacked 11 credibility, was too speculative to uphold the credibility determination
• “In certain circumstances, the governing law may have such widespread familiarity, pristine clarity, and irrefutable applicability that a court could assume the arbitrators knew the rule and, notwithstanding, swept it under the rug.”
• “[J]udges, including administrative law judges of the Social Security 9 Administration, must be careful not to succumb to the temptation to play doctor . . . . Common 10 sense can mislead; lay intuitions about medical phenomena are often wrong.”
• “ ‘[A]s long as the arbitrator is even arguably construing or applying the contract and acting within the scope of his authority,’ a court’s conviction that the arbitrator made a serious mistake or committed grievous error will not furnish a satisfactory basis for undoing the decision.”
• for a Court to vacate an arbitration award based on violation of law, “there must be some showing in the record, other than the result obtained, that the arbitrators . . . appreciated the existence of a governing legal rule but wilfully decided not to apply it”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).