Coast Trading Co., Inc. v. Pacific Molasses Co., Etc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an “arbitrator is confined to the interpreta- tion and application of the parties’ agreement” and that an “award is legitimate only so long as it draws its essence from the . . . agreement”
• holding that an “arbitrator is confined to the interpreta- tion and application of the parties’ agreement” and that an BOSACK v. SOWARD 14345 “award is legitimate only so long as it draws its essence from the . . . agreement”
• vacating \arbitration award as being contrary to remedies provided in the contract\ and rejecting argument that post-dispute submission modified terms of contract
• “The rule is, though the ‘arbitrators’ view of the law might be open to serious question, ... [an award] which is within the terms of the submission, will not be set aside by a court for error either in law or fact’____”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).