Morrison-Knudsen Co. v. Makahuena Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “HRS § 658-8 contemplates a judicial confirmation of the award issued by the arbitrator, ‘unless the award is vacated, modified, or corrected’ in accord with HRS §§ 658-9 and 658-10”
• \`[A]n extensive . . . review of arbitration awards would frustrate the intent of the parties to avoid litigation and would also nullify the legislative objective in the enactment of the Arbitration and Awards statute.'\
• “ ‘[A]n extensive ... review of arbitration awards would frustrate the intent of the parties to avoid litigation and would also nullify the legislative objective in the enactment of the Arbitration and Awards statute.’ ”
• “[T|he fact that an arbitrator may err in applying the law, finding facts, or in construing the contract, or enters an award that is contrary to the evidence adduced, is insufficient grounds for judicial reversal.”
• “HRS § 658-8 contemplates a judicial confirmation of the award issued by the arbitrator, unless the award is vacated, modified, or corrected in accord with HRS §§ 658-9 and 658-10.” (Internal citation and quotation marks omitted.)
• parties to arbitration agreement bargained for arbitrator's decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).