Karppinen v. Karl Kiefer MacHine Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that, where a fraud allegation “raises issues of credibility . . . the 17 party relying on it must show that he could not have discovered it during the 18 arbitration, else he should have invoked it as a defense at that time”
• affirming arbitration award where perjured material evidence was nonetheless \extremely remote\
• “It goes without saying that there should be great hesitation in upsetting an arbitration award. The award here must stand unless it is made abundantly clear that it was obtained through ‘corruption, fraud, or undue means.’ ”
• requirement that evidence was not discoverable at arbitration
• requirement that evidence was not discoverable at arbitration
• assuming without deciding the question

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).