William C. Smith & Co., Inc. v. United States of America, Small Business Adminstration

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the Act provides broader, not narrower, grounds for vacatur than the New York Convention
• noting that Rule 11 sanctions appropriate only \in the exceptional circumstance where a claim or motion is patently unmeritorious or frivolous.\
• holding an arbitration award is irrational when it cannot be supported “on any theory of relief”
• stating that a court “may not overrule an arbitrator simply because [it] disagree[s].” (quoting United Transp. Union Loc. 1589 v. Suburban Transit Corp., 51 F.3d 376, 379 (3d Cir. 1995)
• noting that a court’s role is not to correct factual or legal errors and that an award will be upheld “even if the arbitrator engaged in ‘improvident, even silly, factfinding.’” (citation omitted)
• explaining that parties may contract to arbitrate pursuant to specific arbitration rules

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).