Lagstein v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS, LLOYD'S, LONDON

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that § 10 of the FAA does not authorize 9 judicial review of the merits of an arbitration award
• emphasizing that an arbitrator is \required to disclose 24 only facts indicating that he might reasonably be thought biased 25 against one litigant and favorable to another\
• finding that “evidence of alleged corruption at some time in the past does not relate to this case or the parties to it, nor does it raise a reasonable impression of corruption in the present case.”
• rejecting the need for disclosure of a relationship between a neutral and party-appointed arbitrator where the connection “occurred more than a decade before the arbitration”
• affirming and holding that arbitrators plausibly determined that their initial award was an interim award under the agreement
• finding no evident partiality where the MONSTER ENERGY V. CITY BEVERAGES 11 arbitrator’s alleged ethical misconduct “occurred more than a decade before th[e] arbitration and concerned neither of the parties to the case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).