Legal Opinion · Dissent

McGinity v. Pawtucket Mutual Insurance

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided June 13, 2006No. 2005-32-AppealPublished

1Dissent

I respectfully dissent from the majority's holding in this case. Tripartite arbitration is a unique, anomalous and somewhat murky world. As has been set forth in many cases, non-neutral (or party-appointed) arbitrators are expected to advocate on behalf of the party who appointed them and to do their best to present the facts to the neutral arbitrator in the light most favorable to that party. See, e.g., Local 472, International Brotherhoodof Police Officers v. Town of East Greenwich, 635 A.2d 269 (R.I. 1993); Aetna Casualty Surety Co. v. Grabbert, 590 A.2d 88 (R.I. 1991). Undoubtedly, that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Barcon Associates, Inc. v. Tri-County Asphalt Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
  2. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. GrabbertSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1991
  3. Local 472, International Brotherhood of Police Officers v. Town of East GreenwichSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API