December 11, 2019

December 10, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

December 09, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Court Vacates Arbitration Award on Grounds of Evident Partiality

City Beverages LLC, doing business as Olympic Eagle Distributing, and Monster Energy Co. entered into an agreement under which Monster had exclusive distribution rights for its products in a certain territory for 20 years. Monster exercised its contractual right to terminate the agreement and, in response, Olympic invoked Washington’s Franchise Investment Protection Act, which prohibits termination of a franchise contract absent good cause. Monster thereafter initiated an arbitration proceeding before JAMS pursuant to a mandatory arbitration clause in the parties’ agreement. The parties chose an arbitrator, who submitted disclosure statements prior to the arbitration. The arbitrator ultimately issued a final award in favor of Monster.

Monster filed a petition to confirm the award, and Olympic cross-petitioned to vacate the award based on later-discovered information that Olympic alleged demonstrated that the arbitrator was not impartial. The court vacated the arbitration award. Initially, the court explained that the Federal Arbitration Act permits a court to vacate an arbitration award when there is evident partiality on the part of the arbitrators. Evident partiality includes instances in which the arbitrator fails to disclose to the parties any dealings or interests that might create an impression of possible bias. Here, the arbitrator failed to disclose his ownership interest in JAMS, and that JAMS had administered 97 arbitrations for Monster over the past five years. Based on these facts, the court held that vacatur of the arbitration award was necessary on grounds of evident partiality.

Monster Energy Co. v. City Beverages, LLC, Nos. 17-55813, 17-56082 (9th Cir. Oct. 22, 2019).

©2011-2019 Carlton Fields, P.A.

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Rachel Schwartz Insurance Attorney
Associate

Rachel J. Schwartz represents property and casualty insurance industry clients in litigation and counsels them on varied coverage matters, including coverage disputes arising under Commercial General Liability and Directors & Officer policies.

Rachel drafts pleadings, discovery requests and responses, and motions regarding declaratory judgment actions. She reviews insurance policies and conducts legal research on various insurance coverage topics, including late notice, policy exclusions, duty to defend, allocation, and NY Ins. L. 3420(d). She prepares tenders, carrier position...

212.380.9636