We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Arizona: No Time Limit on Vacatur Motion.
- Abstract
The article presents information on different lawsuits in Arizona. In "Morgan v. Carillon Inv.," the Arizona Supreme Court gave the ruling regarding the time limit for filing a motion to set aside an arbitration award. According to the Court, since there is no time limit for filing the motion, parties can file a motion at any time after an award is issued. In "Scheehle v. Justices of the Supreme Court of Arizona," the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that attorneys licensed in the state could be required to serve as arbitrators in cases referred by the court under the state judicial arbitration stature on October 5, 2005. The court rejected that Section 12-133(c) only requires voluntary service and that Arizona Civil Procedure Rule 73 is in conflict with the rule because it mandates service. The court held that Section 12-133(c) authorizes apex courts to appoint arbitrators to cases in its mandatory arbitration program. The court concluded that the legislature relied on Rule 73 to provide arbitrators to meet the increased demands for the mandatory arbitration program.
- Subjects
ARIZONA; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); MORGAN v. Carillon Inv. (Supreme Court case); SCHEEHLE v. Justices of the Supreme Court of Arizona (Supreme Court case); APPELLATE courts; ARBITRATION &; award; ARIZONA. Supreme Court; LEGISLATIVE bodies; ARBITRATORS; JUDGMENT (Psychology)
- Publication
Dispute Resolution Journal, 2005, Vol 60, Issue 4, p6
- ISSN
1074-8105
- Publication type
Article