Consolidated Pacific Engineering, Inc. v. Greater Anchorage Area Borough
Alaska Supreme Court
1DissentErwin, Justice
I dissent and would affirm the decision of the trial court. I believe the decisions of New York1 and Minnesota2 embody the better reasoned view and should be adopted as the rule in Alaska.
In my opinion, the courts of Alaska have the power to order consolidation of arbitration proceedings even in the absence of statutory authorization in order to avoid duplication of effort, expense and litigation.3 Courts have statutory authority *256to review arbitration proceedings.4 The concept of limited review of arbitration awards adopted by this court5 is rendered impotent by permitting conflicting…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- University of Alaska v. Modern Construction, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1974
- Nizinski v. Golden Valley Electric Ass'n, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1973
- In re the Arbitration between Vigo Steamship Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1970
- Grover-Dimond Associates, Inc. v. American Arbitration Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
- Polshek v. Bergen Cty. Iron WorksNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.