State v. Heilig

How courts have described this case

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

• describing post- arbitration-award lawsuit in which the Court considered whether to enforce or vacate 19 USCA4 Appeal: 21-2116 Doc: 60 Filed: 01/24/2023 Pg: 20 of 43 award
• “Convincing a federal court to vacate an arbitral award is a herculean task.”
• “[S]itting as a panel we cannot overrule a prior panel decision.”
• “[S]itting as a panel we cannot overrule a prior panel decision.”
• “[A]rbitrators are not required to explain their reasoning. But when arbitrators do not provide any explanation, we cannot simply impute manifest disregard” in deciding a motion to vacate the arbitration award
• “[W]hen arbitrators do not explain how they reached a given result, a party seeking vacatur ‘must show that it would be a manifest disregard of law to’ reach that outcome by each and every conceivable route.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).