Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 16 APRIL 2008

Enforcing Judgment In Arbitration Awards – Hall v. Mattel

In the United States, the methods of enforcing a judgment are not available to prevailing parties in an arbitration until the arbitration award is confirmed by a court – thereby converting it into an enforceable judgment.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
David Wawro
David Wawro

In the United States, the methods of enforcing a judgment are not available to prevailing parties in an arbitration until the arbitration award is confirmed by a court – thereby converting it into an enforceable judgment. The Federal Arbitration Act (the FAA) provides expedited judicial review in the federal courts either to confirm an arbitration award or to vacate, modify or correct it on certain narrow grounds specified in the FAA (e.g., if the award was procured by corruption or fraud, or if the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct or exceeded their powers).

An issue that had split the federal appeals courts was whether the parties to an arbitration agreement can broaden the scope of judicial review of awards by specifying a more exacting standard of review in their arbitration agreement. The Supreme Court's recent decision in Hall Street Assoc., L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc. resolved this split in the

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from