Service v. Dulles

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “once the three-month period has expired, an attempt to vacate an arbitration award could not be made even in opposition to a later motion to confirm” (citing Florasynth, Inc, v. Pickholz, 750 F.2d 171, 174— 75 (2d Cir 1984))
• “We do not consider, however, whether due diligence or tolling rules are proper exceptions to the limitations period prescribed by the Federal Arbitration Act”
• “We do not consider, however, whether due diligence or tolling rules are proper exceptions to the limitations period prescribed by the Federal Arbitration Act.”
• confirmation under the FAA is intended to be summary and can only be denied if award is corrected, vacated, or modified in accordance with the Federal Arbitration Act
• “The award in this case was filed on September 11, 1984, and the motion to vacate made on February 12, 1985, more than five months later.”
• “once the three-month period has expired, an attempt to vacate an arbitration award could not be made even in opposition to a later motion to confirm”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).