Legal Opinion
Bonshire v. Thompson
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 7, 1997No. B104347PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
EPSTEIN, Acting P. J.
In this case we hold that when the arbitration clause of a contract specifically prohibits the arbitrator from considering extrinsic evidence, the arbitrator acts in excess of his or her powers in receiving such evidence, over objection, and using it as a basis for the ensuing award.
Jack Bonshire appeals from a judgment confirming an arbitration award against him. He argues that the trial court should have granted his petition to vacate the award because the arbitrator exceeded his powers in admitting extrinsic evidence in contravention of an integration clause in…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v. Intel Corp.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
- Wurzl v. HollowayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Southern California Rapid Transit District v. United Transportation UnionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Tatibouet v. EllsworthHawaii Supreme Court · 2002
- Lambert v. CARNEGHICalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Starzynski v. Capital Public Radio, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Oaktree Capital Management, L.P. v. BernardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Alexander v. Blue Cross of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.