In the Matter of the Arbitration Between Tempo Shain Corporation Neptune Plus Corporation v. Bertek, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that arbitral panel committed misconduct by declining to hold proceedings open to allow testimony of crucial witness who was willing to testify but unavailable for indeterminate period
• holding that federal courts do not “superintend arbitration proceedings;” rather, their review is restricted to determining whether the procedure was fundamentally unfair
• ruling that generally prisoners do not have a 17 “constitutionally-protected liberty interest in being held at, or remaining at, a given 18 facility
• holding that arbitrator’s refusal to hear testimony from a key witness before deciding the case on the merits violated fundamental fairness
• concluding that judicial “review is restricted to determining whether the procedure was fundamentally unfair”
• stating that arbitration does not afford parties with “all the niceties observed by the federal courts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).