We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
COMMERCIAL--TIMELINESS--UNIFORM ARBITRATION ACT--COMMON LAW ARBITRATION--MOTION TO VACATE-- PENNSYLVANIA.
- Abstract
This article presents information on the court case Beriker v. Permagrain Products, in which motions to vacate an arbitration award was brought after the 30-day time limit set forth under the Uniform Arbitration Act of Pennsylvania. A contract calling for arbitration of any disputes had been executed during preliminary planning activities, and the person who filed the lawsuit demanded arbitration in October 1983. Permagrain unsuccessfully sought to enjoin arbitration, claiming that there was no valid agreement to arbitrate in force between the parties, but did not appeal. Arbitration proceeded, resulting in a favorable award to that person, which moved to confirm more than thirty days after the award the court shall enter an order confirming the award. The court, rejecting Permagrain's argument that under Pennsylvania common law it was entitled to challenge the arbitration award at any time in response to the motion to confirm, found that the Uniform Act was governed in this instance.
- Subjects
PENNSYLVANIA; UNITED States; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); PRISMS Enterprises LLC; LEGAL judgments; CONTRACTS
- Publication
Arbitration Journal, 1986, Vol 41, Issue 2, p76
- ISSN
0003-7893
- Publication type
Article