Industrial Risk Insurers v. M.A.N. Gutehoffnungshutte GmbH

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court abused its discretion in awarding sanctions because its decision was based on an erroneous interpretation of a relevant order
• holding that Article V of the New York Convention—instead of the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 10—provides the grounds for the vacatur of an arbitral award un- der the Convention
• explaining that an arbitration not entirely between citizens of the United States is reviewed under section 202 of the Arbitration Act
• requiring de novo review of whether admission of expert testimony at arbitration violated U.S. public policy
• joining the First and Seventh Circuits’ determination of the scope of § 202
• “In the absence of any precedent, we decline to recognize any blanket rule or policy against [experts] ‘side- switching.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).