Legal Opinion

Moncharsh v. Heily & Blase

California Supreme Court

Decided July 30, 1992No. S020997PublishedCited by 497 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*6Opinion

LUCAS, C. J.

We granted review in this case to decide, inter alia, the extent to which a trial court may review an arbitrator’s decision for errors of law. For the reasons discussed below, we conclude an arbitrator’s decision is not generally reviewable for errors of fact or law, whether or not such error appears on the face of the award and causes substantial injustice to the parties. There are, however, limited exceptions to this general rule, which we also discuss below.

Facts

On June 16, 1986, appellant Philip Moncharsh, an attorney, was hired by respondent Heily & Blase, a law firm.…

2Cases cited84 opinions

  1. Shearson/American Express Inc. v. McMahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Fracasse v. BrentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Madden v. Kaiser Foundation HospitalsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Doers v. Golden Gate Bridge, Higway & Transportation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Kearny PBA Local 21 v. Town of KearnySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1979

79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by497 opinions

  1. Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Engalla v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Badie v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  4. Vandenberg v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Oto, L. L.C. v. KhoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019

492 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API