Setting the Standard for Overturning an Arbitrator's Award That Violates Public Policy - United Paperworkers International v. Misco, Inc.

Authors

Brian Darling

Abstract

For over forty years, the United States Supreme Court has recognized the principle that great deference is to be given by the courts to the decisions of arbitrators.2 The Court has applied this same deferential standard in reviewing arbitration awards which are challenged on the basis of being in violation of public policy.3 The well settled rule is that a court must enforce the award unless it violates a well defined, explicit public policy that is ascertained "by reference to the laws and legal precedents and not from general considerations of supposed public interest."4 Recently, the Supreme Court reaffirmed this longstanding rule in United Paperworkers International v. Misco, Inc.5 In doing so, the Court strengthened the arbitrator's authority by laying down a tough two part analysis to be used in determining whether an award can be overturned based on public policy.6 The Court held that not only must the policy be well defined and ascertainable from legal precedent, but the violation must be clearly shown.'

Recommended Citation

Brian Darling, Setting the Standard for Overturning an Arbitrator's Award That Violates Public Policy - United Paperworkers International v. Misco, Inc., 1989 J. Disp. Resol. (1989)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol1989/iss/13