Boyer v. Aurand

2 Watts 74
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 15, 1833·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The award in the case of an umpirage, is the act of the umpire, and here we have it. But it is said that it must purport to have been made by him either alone or conjointly with all the arbitrators; and that here but one of them joined. Does that make the award less the act of the umpire'! The joinder of the arbitrators is but surplusage at best; on which ground alone it is held not to vitiate, and it might, therefore, be supposed that the less there is of it the better. As to the allegation that the interference of the arbitrator who signed may have had an undue influence in the absence of the other, it is enough to say, that it is the joinder in signing and delivering the award, and not the joinder in consultation which was, at one time, deemed material; and even that is now disregarded. The award is, therefore, unexceptionable.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Boyer v. Aurand, 2 Watts 74 (Pa. 1833).

2 Watts 74 (Boyer v. Aurand) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wells v. Scott
1 Miles 125 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1836)