Legal Opinion

Mendel v. Morgan Keegan & Co.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided March 23, 2016No. 15-12801PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc. (“Morgan Keegan”) appeals the district court’s decision to vacate an arbitral award *1002on the ground that a member of the arbitration panel displayed “evident partiality” toward Morgan Keegan, as that term is used in the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq. Morgan Kee-gan argues that the district court wrongly relied on an Alabama Supreme Court decision interpreting the relevant FAA provision, instead of this Court’s binding precedent. It asserts that vacatur was improper under the correct standard. We agree, and therefore reverse the district court…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Larry Bonner v. City of Prichard, AlabamaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1981
  3. Access Now, Inc. v. Southwest Airlines Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2004
  4. Oxford Health Plans LLC v. SutterSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
  5. Rar, Incorporated, an Illinois Corporation v. Turner Diesel, LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Grupo Unidos Por El del Canal, S.A. v. Autoridad del Canal de PanamaDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API