Charles Smith


This article will analyze why the position of the courts-no state action-is correct. Specifically, this article will take the position that the policy of finality traditionally found in arbitration law must trump any constitutional inquiries. This is because arbitration is ultimately based on the parties' agreement, which inevitably recites that the arbitrator's decision shall be final and, in any event, this finality is generally implied.



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.