|
In denying a motion for reconsideration of an order confirming an arbitration award, a federal district court in California held that any right to a jury trial under section 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) does not apply to a motion to confirm an arbitration award because confirmation proceedings are governed by section 9, not section 4.
In Carmack v. Chase Manhattan Bank (USA), No. C 07-02124 WHA, 2007 WL 2729226 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2007), Carmack unsuccessfully challenged an arbitration award in favor of Chase. The Court subsequently confirmed the award. Carmack later filed a motion for reconsideration, claiming that under section 4 of the FAA, she had a right to a jury determination of whether an arbitration agreement ever existed.
The Court denied the motion for reconsideration, holding that the alleged right to a jury trial under section 4 of the FAA was not relevant to the Court’s confirmation of the award because section 9 governs confirmation proceedings while section 4 governs motions to compel.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|