CONCERNED MIN. EDUCATORS v. Sch. Comm. of Worcester

How courts have described this case

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

• \we have no business overruling an arbitrator because we give a contract a different interpretation\
• “we have no business overruling an arbitrator because we give a contract a different interpretation”
• “[W]e have no business overruling an arbitrator because we give a contract a different interpretation”
• where arbitrator’s award, drawing its essence from the agreement, was upheld even though his conclusion demonstrated an error of law
• courts must “consider whether an arbitrator’s award draws its essence from the collective bargaining agreement”
• “We do not, and cannot, pass on an arbitrator’s alleged errors of law and, absent fraud, we have no business overruling an arbitrator because we give a contract a different interpretation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).