Bohlmann v. Printz
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
[Headnotes 1-3]
In this appeal, we discuss the narrow circumstances under which an arbitration award may be vacated due to a manifest disregard of the law. Manifest disregard of the law is something beyond and different from a misinterpretation or error in applying the law. An arbitrator manifestly disregards the law when he or she recognizes that the law absolutely requires a given result and nonetheless refuses to apply the law correctly. Mere error in the application of the law is not grounds to vacate an arbitration award. We conclude that the arbitrator did not manifestly disregard…
3Cases cited8 opinions
- O.R. Securities, Inc. v. Professional Planning Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1988
- George Day Construction Co., Inc. v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 354Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- San Martine Compania De Navegacion, S.A. v. Saguenay Terminals LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
- Wichinsky v. MosaNevada Supreme Court · 1993
- Tim Huey Corp. v. Global Boiler & Mechanical, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by16 opinions
- Pheng Investments, Inc. v. RodriquezCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2006
- Bass-Davis v. DavisNevada Supreme Court · 2006
- Health Plan of Nevada, Inc. v. Rainbow Medical, LLCNevada Supreme Court · 2004
- Sooner Builders & Investments, Inc. v. Nolan Hatcher Construction Services, L.L.C.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2007
- Clark County Education Ass'n v. Clark County School DistrictNevada Supreme Court · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.